Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 18   Go Down

Author Topic: What does it take?  (Read 69027 times)

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #60 on: July 11, 2016, 09:48:24 pm »

I believe that all this would be settled if we could at least get clear nationwide stats about the % of US population per state in favour of stronger gun control laws...

From the article Bart quoted earlier:

Quote
Since 1990, Gallup has been asking Americans whether they think gun control laws should be stricter.

The answer, increasingly, is that they don't.

"Less than half of Americans, 47%, say they favor stricter laws covering the sale of firearms, similar to views found last year," Gallup says. "But this percentage is significantly below the 58% recorded in 2012 after the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, spurred a nationwide debate about the possibility of more stringent gun control laws. Thirty-eight percent of Americans say these laws should be kept as they are now, and 14% say they should be made less strict."

Note that the support for stricter gun controls is trending down, not up, since 2000:
« Last Edit: July 11, 2016, 09:54:27 pm by Slobodan Blagojevic »
Logged

Colorado David

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1178
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #61 on: July 11, 2016, 10:01:02 pm »

I haven't read this entire topic and I don't intend to. This will be my only post on this topic. I just want to correct one thing. There is no gun show loophole. It is a creation of the media. If you buy a gun from someone displaying at a table at a gun show, you are subject to the same background check system as if you bought it from a brick and mortar gun or sporting goods store. The BATFE is there monitoring the shows. In SOME states you are not subject to a background check for a private sale. That is one individual selling or transferring a gun to another individual. In some states a father cannot give a gun that has been in the family to his son is without the transfer going through an FFL holder and the transfer being entered in their ledger.

tom b

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1471
    • http://tombrown.id.au
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #62 on: July 11, 2016, 10:01:30 pm »

It just goes on and on…

Michigan

Oh well, at least you have your guns, all three hundred million of them.

Good luck, you need it.
Logged
Tom Brown

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #63 on: July 11, 2016, 10:06:37 pm »

It just goes on and on…

Michigan

Man, whatever you are smoking down under, must be much more potent than here.

tom b

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1471
    • http://tombrown.id.au
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #64 on: July 11, 2016, 10:27:00 pm »

Man, whatever you are smoking down under, must be much more potent than here.

What is the line that has to be crossed before gun control is a possibility?

It was 35 dead for Australia.

You don't have to be on drugs to think that Columbine or Sandy Hook should have been that line. In fact what drugs are you taking Slobodan?
Logged
Tom Brown

marvpelkey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 310
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #65 on: July 11, 2016, 10:34:41 pm »

Coincidentally, a week or so prior to the Baton Rouge and Minnesota shootings, I asked my son, born and raised in B.C. Canada but a resident of Denver Co for the last six or so years, about the US federal political happenings and his conversations with locals. He replied that within a short time of arriving to Denver, he learned that it was fruitless to discuss two topics - politics and firearms. Each side in both topics is just too entrenched and they refuse to change their minds or look at the issues from the opposite perspective.

As an outsider and someone who believes I should not force my opinion on members of another nation, I would still like to offer a couple comments however.

Growing up in a small town in northern B.C. I had a lot of exposure to long guns for hunting and target shooting, and as a career police officer (in the greater Vancouver area), continued to be around many types of firearms. During that career, it was fairly rare to encounter citizens, or even bad guys, with firearms (and it is still relatively unusual for an officer, but the frequency is increasing). Having said all that, I just cannot rap my mind around the idea of so many firearms, especially semi auto military style weapons, being so accessible to, and in the hands of virtually everyone within a society. I'm reasonably familiar with the Second Amendment issues, but it still boggles my mind.

Regarding some of John Koerner's comments:

Canada is, as well, a country which seems to be greatly impacted by the arrival of foreigners, many who seem intent on living within their own ethnic enclaves and refuse to "blend in" (one of the larger cities in the area is now predominantly Asian population; one apartment building has an Asian majority so the majority decided to hold their meetings in Mandarin, effectively shutting out the minority English speaking residents), and also take advantage of the many social/health programs. I should stress that there are many, many arrivals who do blend in and become a member of our society. But I have seen and do see many frustrated and angry locals who resent these "foreign freeloaders" and the inability to be able to express their fears and anger because of the political correctness restrictions. The same goes for non immigrant layabouts and homeless persons who demand everything and give back nothing. However, one of the biggest differences between us and the U.S. is, presumably because of the lack of firearms, few shooting deaths result from those frustrations and the angry interaction between those who take and those who resent.

I, wholeheartedly, agree that an immigrant must integrate themselves into the new society, learn the language, become a valid member of society and follow the rules and laws of that country (don't get me started on our laws/rules being changed to allow turbans to be worn instead of motorcycle helmets and turbans and other religious "accoutrements" to be worn instead of the standard uniform of the police - ya wanna be a cop, wear the damn uniform).

I think the situation in the U.S. is irreversible and in fact, with all the emotion and entrenched positions (both with the citizenry and politicians), I can only see things get worse. I am proud to be a neighbour and friend to the U.S.and have seen that country overcome seemingly insurmountable issues over the years, but I fear they will lose this one.

Marv
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #66 on: July 11, 2016, 10:59:49 pm »

We agree on much, Marv.

I think the USA situation is different from Canada, not because of guns, but because of true racial division (rooted in slavery in our past) combined with true unity breakdown due to "political correctness" run wild.

There is simply more volatility here IMO.

We are so permissive now, it is disgusting.

We can't simply label something as WRONG and punish the action to its uttermost.

The media shows every horrible thing it can, fans the flames, and provides insipid "commentary" to amuse the masses.

Hell, as with Hillary, treason is even "okay" ... no biggie, let's not spoil the campaign.
(To me, there is only one appropriate punishment for treason, and it's not a fine or an apology  >:()

As far as hate goes, our media thrives on it, gives it air (and thus life) and puts it on our mind and in our hearts, rather than responsibly covering good deeds and positive achievements.
I firmly believe that outfits such as the KKK and Black Lives Matter are un-American, accomplish nothing positive, stir nothing but hate, and should be abolished.

The concept of "free speech" and "pursuing happiness" has been so confounded and overdone that (again) there is no accountability anymore, no standards of excellence to shoot for.

Not sure anything is irreversible, but it would take a lot of work and a truly strong, fair leader (with integrity) to get our country back on course.

Best regards,

Jack
Logged

Colorado David

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1178
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #67 on: July 11, 2016, 11:33:20 pm »

It just goes on and on…

Michigan

Oh well, at least you have your guns, all three hundred million of them.

Good luck, you need it.

Okay, I lied. One more post for correction.  The story didn't mention that the perp took the gun away from a uniformed law enforcement officer.  The story read as if the bad guy just somehow managed to get possession of a gun and then shot people.  Totally disingenuous reporting.

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #68 on: July 11, 2016, 11:48:01 pm »

Okay, I lied. One more post for correction.  The story didn't mention that the perp took the gun away from a uniformed law enforcement officer.  The story read as if the bad guy just somehow managed to get possession of a gun and then shot people.  Totally disingenuous reporting.

As mentioned above, "our media thrives on it, gives it air (and thus life) and puts it on our mind ..."

Total permissiveness. The concept of "freedom of the press" confounded to make it okay lying to the public, just to stir the hornet's nest.

"Freedom of the press" should carry with it an absolute duty of honesty.

Instead, it basically means they can say what they want, with no accountability.

Our problems always boil down to the same thing: total permissiveness, no standards, and no accountability anymore.

Logged

marvpelkey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 310
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #69 on: July 12, 2016, 12:10:43 am »

John,

You are correct. We certainly do not have the racial history that you do. The closest thing that I can equate it to is the historical relationship with our First Nations . We had a reserve that we were responsible for policing and if I had a dollar for every time I or other officers encountered "Get the ***k off our land, were spit on, sworn at, threatened and assaulted while dealing with native problems, I could have retired long before I did. And I'm not aware of any incident where a native died in a police involved encounter.

Funny thing is, I've travelled extensively throughout the States over years and years, from L.A. to Florida to Denver and most points in between (even to Baton Rouge when my partner and I had to go down to follow-up on a homicide we were investigating up here) and I have had many casual/social encounters with African Americans in all areas at all times of the day and night (in fact one night in a known gang area in L.A. where the cops in a marked cruiser refused to roll down the window and give us directions out of the area while a couple local African American males on the corner were most helpful), and I have always been treated with respect and politeness (and I look like any average white guy).

I'm a bit of a news nut and watch CNN and other U.S. news outlets on a regular basis. I agree with you about their treatment of the news and how/what they deliver to the public. Less obvious up here but I see it going in the same direction.

I don't see a current quality candidate from either side that is capable of leading your country out of this mess. And with the federal political quagmire that seems to be ever pervasive, I can't see anything changing in any appreciable way. Certainly not in our lifetime.

Regards,

Marv
Logged

tom b

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1471
    • http://tombrown.id.au
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #70 on: July 12, 2016, 12:27:15 am »

Just to point out the obvious again. "33,636 gun deaths in one year". How thick do you have to be to think that that is OK?

Really,
Logged
Tom Brown

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #71 on: July 12, 2016, 12:53:19 am »

Just to point out the obvious again. "33,636 gun deaths in one year". How thick do you have to be to think that that is OK?
Really,


What is obvious?

Statistics

All poisoning deaths
Number of deaths: 48,545
Deaths per 100,000 population: 15.4

Motor vehicle traffic deaths
Number of deaths: 33,804
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.7

All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 33,636
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.6

Seems like deaths by firearm are fewer than by car or by poison.

10.6 deaths per 100,000 is less than .00001%

Your "logic" is to ban guns for every law-abiding citizen because 1 in 10,000 people die by firearm?

Should we ban cars because they have the same number or deaths ... and all forms of poison while we're at it?

Get some perspective, eh?

Poisons are useful; vehicles are useful; guns are useful.

You don't ban these things; you accept the risks because you understand the reward.

You can't ban carelessness, bad intentions, or stupidity. People will always die because of "something" ...

If your home were ever invaded, which would you rather have immediately available to grab: a phone or a gun?
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #72 on: July 12, 2016, 01:07:43 am »

John,

You are correct. We certainly do not have the racial history that you do. The closest thing that I can equate it to is the historical relationship with our First Nations . We had a reserve that we were responsible for policing and if I had a dollar for every time I or other officers encountered "Get the ***k off our land, were spit on, sworn at, threatened and assaulted while dealing with native problems, I could have retired long before I did. And I'm not aware of any incident where a native died in a police involved encounter.

Interesting recount. I am sure there are differences in behaviors and cultures.



Funny thing is, I've travelled extensively throughout the States over years and years, from L.A. to Florida to Denver and most points in between (even to Baton Rouge when my partner and I had to go down to follow-up on a homicide we were investigating up here) and I have had many casual/social encounters with African Americans in all areas at all times of the day and night (in fact one night in a known gang area in L.A. where the cops in a marked cruiser refused to roll down the window and give us directions out of the area while a couple local African American males on the corner were most helpful), and I have always been treated with respect and politeness (and I look like any average white guy).

I have similar experiences as a casualty investigator. Have interviewed and dealt with folks of all walks of life. Had a case where a bus ran over a woman, crushing her head, and 2 of the key witnesses were homeless persons in the armpit of Los Angeles. Not only had to find them, but interview them in their preferred element. Cruised the area for more witnesses, all of whom were of various ethnic varieties except my own. All very helpful, very concerned, no problems. The bus that ran over the woman was an Asian Tour Line Bus, and there were 54 witnesses, all of whom spoke either Mandarin or Cantonese, half of whom were not citizens but visitors. Most were UNfriendly, and didn't want to get involved; some, however, were very helpful. The main witness wound up being an Hispanic junk dealer who was right there dealing his goods when it happened.



I'm a bit of a news nut and watch CNN and other U.S. news outlets on a regular basis. I agree with you about their treatment of the news and how/what they deliver to the public. Less obvious up here but I see it going in the same direction.

It's scary how powerful the media is, literally shaping the minds of Americans (or Canadians, etc.) ... and most don't realize how manipulated they are.



I don't see a current quality candidate from either side that is capable of leading your country out of this mess. And with the federal political quagmire that seems to be ever pervasive, I can't see anything changing in any appreciable way. Certainly not in our lifetime.
Regards,
Marv

That's because the media won't show you the reasonable, ethical Libertarians Gary Johnson and Bill Weld. The best candidates are therefore never seen (out of sight, out of mind).

Johnson was one of the only 2 governors (New Mexico) who turned that state's deficit into a surplus; vetoed every tax raise that he came across; Weld created a "work for welfare" program in that state ... and saw a 75% reduction in applications for this service.

Jack
Logged

Rand47

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1902
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #73 on: July 12, 2016, 01:13:53 am »

These discussions strike me as odd.  It seems to me that the root problem is the evil that mankind does.  I was watching a program on Stonehenge the other night, and they were showing skulls that had been bashed in by flint axes. This problem is not a new one. What I marvel most about is that the reportage characterizes what happened in Dallas as "a tragedy." For certain it is, for those killed and their families.  But the event isn't a tragedy, it is an intentional act of evil done by someone intending to do evil, or by a deranged individual.  It is not a tragedy like a hurricane, or a sattelite falling out of orbit and landing on five police officers. 

I don't think any society has a chance of correcting a problem if they can't inentify what it is.  I'm all for appropriate contol of fire arms, but I don't kid myself into thinking there is direct linkage between that need and prevention of what happened in Dallas.  America is rapidly losing both its moral consensus and critical thinking ability, and what we're seeing seems to me to be the logical outworking of both.

Rand
« Last Edit: July 12, 2016, 01:23:16 am by Rand47 »
Logged
Rand Scott Adams

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #74 on: July 12, 2016, 02:05:19 am »

Rand, the tragedy is that Lunacrats' pandering for votes and longing for a revolution has turned words into deeds and has resulted in the loss of innocent life. And it is not just Dallas, it started with DeBlasio opening the season on cops that resulted in the execution of two cops in New York a year or so ago. The tragedy is that the whole race is drinking Lunacrats' CoolAid and getting high on the peddled victimhood smoke. The tragedy is that Lunacrats are sidetracking the debate about the real causes of crime by substituting it with talks about gun control, "bad" cops, and "racism." The real causes remain unaddressed: poverty, unemployment, and lack of decent jobs for inner cities and everyone else. The tragedy is that American businesses are developing middle class in Asia and Latin America, while pauperizing its own. The tragedy is that Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, and other cities with high crime have been run by Lunacrats for decades, resorting to the same failed prescription of ever-increasing entitlements, instead of creating or preserving jobs.

tom b

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1471
    • http://tombrown.id.au
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #75 on: July 12, 2016, 02:55:30 am »

Number of deaths in the US by terrorists in the past decade 24.

Number of gun deaths in the same period 280,000.

Gun deaths

Denial, denial, denial!

If you want to feel safe in your American home, get rid of your gun.

Gun deaths are mainly suicide

Sorry,
Logged
Tom Brown

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25122
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #76 on: July 12, 2016, 06:44:22 am »

1.  I think it's too late for the U.S. to do anything about guns. At most, you could make buying new guns more difficult, deny access to military-style weapons (was always a mad idea to allow them), and offer an amnesty to anyone surrendering weapons they shouldn't have owned at all.

2.  Drugs must also contribute to the state of mind of anyone in an 'arrest' situation. I can't see anyone sober or sane even thinking of trying to run away from a police confrontation situation.

3.  Yes, the problems due to press coverage are huge; never mind crime reporting - just think of how Brexit was reported, the tv and printed lies on which it was based, the inbred 'them 'n' usness' of much of British life, the religious divides, the ethnic divisions and the language barriers and it's no wonder some feel the nation has been sold off, that others think the solution lies in self-mutilation.

4. Had we guns, we'd be the U.S. writ large because we have far less space in which to play the same game.

It's pointless trying to use statistics: simply looking at the views expressed on this thread, it's obvious that all that happens is one guy calls white and the other black; neither side wants to admit to the overlap of causes/effects/moderations.

As recent UK history shows, you can never overestimate the stupidity of the general public. The general public is the Red Tops. The sales figures show that. People believe what they see in the press - what else do most have upon which to draw? If you have never owned shares, you won't consciously know or be very aware that you can lose your shirt; the great unwashed think you "live off the sweat of the workers" and never lose more than you gain. One nation? Right.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2016, 01:59:32 pm by Rob C »
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16748
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #77 on: July 12, 2016, 10:16:22 am »

You don't have to be on drugs to think that Columbine or Sandy Hook should have been that line.

What are you talking about Tom? Both Columbine and Sandy Hook are gun-free zones. There couldn't possibly have been any guns there. The shooting stories must be myths.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #78 on: July 12, 2016, 10:16:49 am »

...If you want to feel safe in your American home, get rid of your gun.

Gun deaths are mainly suicide

Mate, you keep finding totally non-sensical explanations for the links you post. If gun deaths are manly suicide (and they are) how am I going to feel safe in my home if I get rid of the gun!? Are you suggesting that I would be committing suicide because I have a gun? Or that the gun is committing my suicide?

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25122
Re: What does it take?
« Reply #79 on: July 12, 2016, 10:34:44 am »

The problem with the gun, Slobodan, is that it makes you feel invincible, and with that, in place of a more reasoned 'fight or flight', must come a sense of too much muscle, where you play the atomic bomb card rather than anything a tad less drastic.

Insofar as police reaction when talking to somebody sitting in a car, tension must be so high in a situation where the cop knows there's every chance that rather than a wallet he'll be shown a pistol, especially at night with poor light, that mistakes are accidents waiting to happen.

Possibly, correct reaction to being stopped by a patrolman might be included in the driving test - something as basic as always keep both hands on the wheel at five-to-one (or five past eleven, if your day is different), and never depart from that position until told to do so. Then do it very slowly and obviously.

Rob
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 18   Go Up