Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 34      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   6   Next   »
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 7,877
Reply with quote  #61 
Dewey, Dewey, Dewey. Hand grenades and Jack Daniels make for great times on Saturday nights.
bluedog

Registered:
Posts: 9,282
Reply with quote  #62 
Quote:
The Anti gun groups are going to parade those poor grieving parents from Newtown in front of the cameras and the media is going to exploit it to the max.


This is what we need to look at to see what is wrong with America.....What a shame...Now, we will see what the Republicans are made of....They better hold the line for no new gun laws!
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #63 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec
Dewey, Dewey, Dewey. Hand grenades and Jack Daniels make for great times on Saturday nights.


New Years Eve must be scary.

__________________
President Obama kept Republicans out of the White House for 8 years and added two excellent justices to the Supreme Court.  Those two things alone make him one of our greatest Presidents of my lifetime.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,784
Reply with quote  #64 
Since we are going to start banning things, a few suggestions...


http://ow.ly/gh8aN



__________________
#MakeDCListen #End Socialism #NoDems #2016 #ForAmerica
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,347
Reply with quote  #65 
A while back a shooting in a school occurred. Principal detained the suspect. How did he "detain" the suspect????


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting



In 1927, a mass killing at a school. What type of assault weapon was used?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #66 
This incident was in the news when it happened but because we did not have facebook, twitter, and fox news and msnbc had just launched a year earlier and were not what they are today.
So if you did not read it in your newspaper, see in on AOL, or on national news tv you did not hear about it (like many other things).
....................

The Pearl High School shooting  incident began on the morning of October 1, 1997 when Luke Woodham fatally stabbed and bludgeoned his mother, Mary Woodham, as she prepared for a morning jog. At his trial, Woodham claimed that he could not remember killing his mother.
 
Woodham drove his mother's car to Pearl High School. Wearing a trench coat, to hide his rifle when he entered the school, Woodham fatally shot Lydia Kaye Dew and Christina Menefee, his former girlfriend. Pearl High School's assistant band director, Jeff Cannon, was standing five feet away from Dew when she was fatally shot. Woodham went on to wound seven others.
 
The school's assistant principal, Joel Myrick, retrieved a .45 pistol from his truck and, spotting him near the parking lot, shouted for Woodham to stop. Woodham instead got into a his mother's car and tried to escape. Myrick, a US Army Reserve commander, detained Woodham until authorities arrived.

.............
He killed 2 (after killing his mom) and wounded 7 others. He was stopped leaving the scene. He wasn't stopped.
He was a practicing satanist. Since being locked up he has converted to christianity.
He had 2 sperate trials. He used iunsanity plea on murder of his mom and got life. Insanity plea was rejected for 2nd trial and he got 2 more life sentances and 20 years for each of the 7. So 3 life sentances and 7-20 year sentences. The crappy part is he is up for parole in 2046 when he is 65. Our system allows for this filth to be able to go back into society after killing  his mom and 2 other people and wounding many others. WTF??

A guy drives up to a school and gets out of their car and enters a school and shoots up 9 people and walks out and gets into their vehicle before someone gets a gun and holds them at gunpoint til police show up. Lack of security is the issue. No one should get into a school without being on camera and security guards alerted and on scene armed. Use our tax dollars on security and cut back on the millions spent by polititians flying around and living the rich lifestyle on tax payers dollar.
 

__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,124
Reply with quote  #67 

Last month, I sentenced Jared Lee Loughner to seven consecutive life terms plus 140 years in federal prison for his shooting rampage in Tucson. That tragedy left six people dead, more than twice that number injured and a community shaken to its core.

Loughner deserved his punishment. But during the sentencing, I also questioned the social utility of high-capacity magazines like the one that fed his Glock. And I lamented the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban in 2004, which prohibited the manufacture and importation of certain particularly deadly guns, as well as magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

The ban wasn't all that stringent — if you already owned a banned gun or high-capacity magazine you could keep it, and you could sell it to someone else — but at least it was something.

And it says something that half of the nation's deadliest shootings occurred after the ban expired, including the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn. It also says something that it has not even been two years since Loughner's rampage, and already six mass shootings have been deadlier.

I am not a social scientist, and I know that very smart ones are divided on what to do about gun violence. But reasonable, good-faith debates have boundaries, and in the debate about guns, a high-capacity magazine has always seemed to me beyond them.

Bystanders got to Loughner and subdued him only after he emptied one 31-round magazine and was trying to load another. Adam Lanza, the Newtown shooter, chose as his primary weapon a semiautomatic rifle with 30-round magazines. And we don't even bother to call the 100-rounder that James Holmes is accused of emptying in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater a magazine — it is a drum. How is this not an argument for regulating the number of rounds a gun can fire?

I get it. Someone bent on mass murder who has only a 10-round magazine or revolvers at his disposal probably is not going to abandon his plan and instead try to talk his problems out. But we might be able to take the "mass" out of "mass shooting," or at least make the perpetrator's job a bit harder.

To guarantee that there would never be another Tucson or Sandy Hook, we would probably have to make it a capital offense to so much as look at a gun. And that would create serious 2nd Amendment, 8th Amendment and logistical problems.

So what's the alternative? Bring back the assault weapons ban, and bring it back with some teeth this time. Ban the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer and possession of both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Don't let people who already have them keep them. Don't let ones that have already been manufactured stay on the market. I don't care whether it's called gun control or a gun ban. I'm for it.

I say all of this as a gun owner. I say it as a conservative who was appointed to the federal bench by a Republican president. I say it as someone who prefers Fox News to MSNBC, and National Review Online to the Daily Kos. I say it as someone who thinks the Supreme Court got it right in District of Columbia vs. Heller, when it held that the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to possess guns for self-defense. (That's why I have mine.) I say it as someone who, generally speaking, is not a big fan of the regulatory state.

I even say it as someone whose feelings about the NRA mirror the left's feelings about Planned Parenthood: It has a useful advocacy function in our deliberative democracy, and much of what it does should not be controversial at all.

And I say it, finally, mindful of the arguments on the other side, at least as I understand them: that a high-capacity magazine is not that different from multiple smaller-capacity magazines; and that if we ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines one day, there's a danger we would ban guns altogether the next, and your life might depend on you having one.

But if we can't find a way to draw sensible lines with guns that balance individual rights and the public interest, we may as well call the American experiment in democracy a failure.

There is just no reason civilians need to own assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Gun enthusiasts can still have their venison chili, shoot for sport and competition, and make a home invader flee for his life without pretending they are a part of the SEAL team that took out Osama bin Laden.

It speaks horribly of the public discourse in this country that talking about gun reform in the wake of a mass shooting is regarded as inappropriate or as politicizing the tragedy. But such a conversation is political only to those who are ideologically predisposed to see regulation of any kind as the creep of tyranny. And it is inappropriate only to those delusional enough to believe it would disrespect the victims of gun violence to do anything other than sit around and mourn their passing. Mourning is important, but so is decisive action.

Congress must reinstate and toughen the ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

Larry Alan Burns is a federal district judge in San Diego.


__________________
“The hand of help has no color. The face of caring has no shape. The language of love has no accent.” - Unattributed
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,347
Reply with quote  #68 
DC, your "Republican" San Diego judge, can wax his opinion straight into the Pacific ocean. The Constitution of the United States allows it's citizens to bear arms, not just to hunt, and defend against those that would rob, and kill them. It most specifically provides the rights of citizens to bear arms in order to keep a strong centralized government from eroding the other 26 amendments to the constitution, and also insures that the Bill of Rights will be upheld. Our Founding Fathers new what tyranny was, and revolted against it, and the Monarchy that oppressed them. Please feel free to disarm yourself, your friends, and entire neighborhood. As for me, I will live as a free man, and protect my family with the best advantage I can obtain. If you care to wait for the police to write an insurance report, or death report for you and yours, by all means you are free to do so. However, never come between me, and my Constitutional right to defend my family, and my freedom. No matter what article, your Liberal feel good heart is tugged by, you are not going to disarm me and over 100 million Americans. The Democratic Party may feel emboldened to disarm the Left leaning Blue states of the Northeast, and Far Leftist coast, but they will not disarm the American public, and make them slaves to your socialist experiment. It ain't gonna happen, and there will be no compromise, or reasoned discussion about degrading my individual rights, or leaving my family exposed to violence, or allowing a Socialist Government to take away my rights to do so. I hope I wasn't too vague, or in any way unspecific in my response.
__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
ice_67

Registered:
Posts: 143
Reply with quote  #69 

So the President can have armed guards but schools can’t. Why?

Our airports have armed guards but schools can’t. Why?

Airplanes can have plain clothes armed guards but schools can’t. Why?

Congress has armed security, but schools can’t. Why

Professional ball parks have armed guards, but schools can’t. Why?

Shopping malls have armed security, but schools can’t. Why?

Rock Concerts have armed guards, but schools can’t. Why?

National parks have armed guards, but schools can’t. Why?

Court rooms have armed guards, but schools can’t. Why?

Businesses have armed guards, but schools can’t. Why?

Clubs and Bars have security guards, but schools can’t. Why?

Seems to me that our society forgot to guard our most important location, our schools.

mikec

Registered:
Posts: 7,877
Reply with quote  #70 
Again, we have them here in the south. In my daughter's middle school, the officer stopped a plot by a kid to throw about a dozen flaming mason jars full of gasoline at his classmates. That officer took a knife to stomach in stopping the attack. The kid was ready to start lighting them, when the officer intervened.

At dinner tonight, my kids caught a bit of the debate over armed officers at schools. In short, they couldn't believe that every school doesn't have them, and they are glad they do.

I am absolutely baffled by the idea of any resistance to that.
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,124
Reply with quote  #71 
woody, you and I are so far apart on almost everything that you may as well be speaking Navajo and I Mandarin - we will never be able to communicate.

What you believe is best for you may be best for you, but not our country.  Who knows who is right?  But what we've got sure isn't working.  Is arming more people the answer?  Is putting armed guards at every school the answer?  You would probably say yes, but I would say I'm not sure.  Columbine had 2 armed guards and the shootings still occurred.  A crazy person will probably still figure out a way to get into a school or a shopping mall or a ball game or a concert and could do major damage before any armed guard could get to him.  He could pose as a deliveryman, or a janitor, a parent, whatever.  A couple of armed teachers would be no match for a crazy guy with an assault rifle.  And what if they started shooting at a perceived threat, and turned out to be wrong?  What if innocent people are killed, including kids?

I have many more questions than answers.  Why do we (the US) represent less than 5% of the world population, yet we own an estimated 50% of the guns?  We don't have the highest firearms-related homicide rate in the world, but ours is 4 times that of any other industrialized country. A study in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery found that the gun murder rate in the U.S. is almost 20 times higher than the next 22 richest and most populous nations combined.Among the world’s 23 wealthiest countries, 80 percent of all gun deaths are American deaths and 87 percent of all kids killed by guns are American kids.

If guns are supposed to make us safer, why aren't we?  The states with the highest level of gun homicides are also the states with the highest level of gun ownership.  There are almost as many guns in the US as people, yet the majority of people don't own guns.  Current gun owners are stocking up and buying more.

The Washington Post says -

There’s a name for those gun buyers: Republicans. As the FiveThirtyEight blog noted Tuesday, the 2010 General Social Survey showed that 50 percent of adult Republicans owned guns, while only 22 percent of adult Democrats did. This gap in gun-ownership rates has swelled over the past 40 years: In the 1973 survey, 55 percent of Republicans and 45 percent of Democrats had a gun at home. Polls suggest this gap will continue to widen: In the 2008 national exit polls, the percentage of Democrats with guns declined as the age cohorts grew younger, while the GOP rate of gun ownership was the same across all age groups. Increasingly, then, it’s our shrinking Republican minority that is buying guns.

Why are there so many more mass shootings in the US than anywhere else in the world?  In Europe, they watch the same TV shows, see the same movies, and play the same video games.  Yet the number of mass shootings in Europe is far fewer than in the US.



What is it?  The availability of guns?  Our culture?  Our character?

ABC News says -

The public by 52-43 percent sees the atrocity in Connecticut as indicating “broader problems in American society” rather than just the isolated act of a troubled individual. Many fewer saw the shootings last July in Aurora, Colorado, or last year in Tucson, Arizona, as signs of a broader societal problem, 24 and 31 percent, respectively, in polls by the Pew Research Center.

Views were more similar to today’s after the shootings at Virginia Tech in 2007, when the public divided, 46-47 percent in a Pew poll, on whether broader societal problems were at play. But the Connecticut shootings mark the first of these incidents that’s been seen by more than half the public as indicating a broader problem.

Notably, political and ideological differences are muted in this assessment: Half or more of Democrats, independents and Republicans alike see a broader societal problem (51, 52 and 57 percent, respectively). It’s also about half both among liberals and conservatives.


Are we going to be able to take 300 million guns away from their owners?  No.  And should we?  No.  Do ordinary citizens need to own assault-type weapons?  I would have to say no.  Do they need extended magazines that hold up to 100 bullets?  Again, I would say no.  What is their intended use if not for inflicting massive injury or death?  And I also have a problem with hollow point bullets, which it appears that the CT shooter used, based on the medical examiner's description of the injuries.  Not to be graphic, but the thought of the damage done to those 20 little bodies just makes me want to vomit.  Does an ordinary citizen gun owner really need this type of destructive ammo?

The Second Amendment argument only goes so far.  Does it preclude gun control/  Many constitutional experts say no.  The Second Amendment refers to a well regulated militia.  So it appears that they did anticipate some limits to the ownership of weapons.  Did our founding fathers ever anticipate the types of firearms we have now?  Certainly not.  Did they anticipate automatic and semi-automatic weapons, grenade launchers, hollow point bullets, machine guns, grenades, chemical or nuclear weapons, etc?  No.  The highest courts have ruled that reasonable limits can be imposed.

So, woody, you can claim that nothing can be done to "degrade" your individual rights to own guns, but that may not be true in the coming years.  Do I expect you to ever give up your precious guns?  Of course not.  But do I agree with your assessment of gun ownership?  The answer is clear.  At least as clear as a discussion in Navajo-Mandarin can be.


__________________
“The hand of help has no color. The face of caring has no shape. The language of love has no accent.” - Unattributed
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 7,877
Reply with quote  #72 
The famous comma is keeping you up at night, evidently:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,347
Reply with quote  #73 
DC, destructive ammo? I wasn't aware that ammunition could be non destructive. A little primer just for you, the non gun owning and unknowing.  

FMJ, military rounds that have lead surrounded by a metal band. These rounds are cheap to make, and do not mushroom after impact, they retain a slightly deformed shape, and make a clean wound channel, and often pass pass straight through, leaving very little exit wound. This is what most people with AR-15's have by the 1000 round cases. They are cheap, and are used for target shooting, and hog and varmint control.

Soft Point, or pointed soft point, or ballistic tipped soft point, standard type, or BT(boat tailed) Used for hunting, and self defense. Lead with at most, a small band of metal to decrease deforming on initial impact. Rounded soft point, used in lever action rifles, and pistols. Lever action rifles need a rounded point when loaded in a tube magazine to prevent ignition of the primer (the small cap in the base of the bullet) that ignites the powder charge. PSP, a pointed tip instead of rounded for better ballistics. Ballistic Tip has a small plastic tip for even better accuracy down range. Boat tailed ballistic tips are the most accurate available for long range shooting. All these bullets mushroom after initial impact, creating a large wound channel, and significant exit wound. This is what most deer are shot with.

Hollow Point. Used for self defense, and varmint shooting. In rifle cartridges they are often boat tailed, and have a plastic tip, or covering, for long range accuracy. For self defense pistol ammo, they are a rounded lead point, with the middle having a hollow core about the size of 2 pencil leads. This bullet expands upon contact, sometimes splintering into multiple pieces, they have a massive wound channel, but are not used for hunting deer, or big game much, because they will often not exit at longer ranges, making little blood trail to follow. As a self defense round out of a pistol, they are very effective at close range, and what many prefer.

Teflon coated bullets are tipped, and coated with Teflon. These were banned at one time because they are said to be able to penetrate body armor. 

I believe you will find that the CT shooter did not use hollow points.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

So if you want security, hire the best you can find, you get what you pay for. Schools, and shopping malls should have security, not an unarmed teenager or 20 something driving around in a golf cart. We have horseback patrols of shopping mall parking lots by armed deputies. If you don't want to have a weapon, and feel confident a law officer will be around to help defend you and yours, that is your right. I on the other hand live in the country, and cannot depend on a police officer being 20 minutes away, when seconds count. I carry a gun, because a cop is too heavy to carry around all the time.

__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #74 
Diet Coke - I read and then studied your post, and it contains almost everything I have to say about gun control, and I do believe that the Mandarin-Navajo first premise argument is a realistic one.     Frank
PS - I believe that all weapons types should be examined carefully and each then evaluated in terms of individual need and purpose, and also protection departmental (police) need and purpose, as well as the military.  I believe the same should be done with types of ammunition.  Then appropriateness of sale to the general public can be assessed and enforced despite the NRA financial lobby.  Woody - I love your statement that a gun weighs less than a cop, but is your gun appropriate for your needs and purposes?  Do you need a howitzer because you live "in the country" or would a handgun suffice?

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #75 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec
Dewey, Dewey, Dewey. Hand grenades and Jack Daniels make for great times on Saturday nights.


mikec - On a more serious note, wouldn't hand grenades be an effective part of the arsenal for any State militia, or be an important part of ones personal cache protecting against a Federal Government run amok?

I can't help thinking of the comment that noted when the Constitution was written, arms were muskets.  In any event, there will never be a consensus but there will be a vote.  Voting is also an important part of our Constitution.

__________________
President Obama kept Republicans out of the White House for 8 years and added two excellent justices to the Supreme Court.  Those two things alone make him one of our greatest Presidents of my lifetime.
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,124
Reply with quote  #76 
Chief Medical Examiner H. Wayne Carver II said during a news conference [click here to view] that all victims appeared to have multiple wounds, and the majority of them were likely not shot at close range. ‘This type of weapon, the bullets were designed in such a fashion that the energy is deposited in the tissue, and so the bullet stays in,’ Carver said. ‘This is a very devastating set of injuries.’”


Nothing has been said for sure, but it sounds like the shooter could very well have used hollow point bullets.  In any event, the ammo used caused major internal injuries and I still question if most gun owners need this type of ammo.

__________________
“The hand of help has no color. The face of caring has no shape. The language of love has no accent.” - Unattributed
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #77 

Video games and violence on tv and movies were attacked....and they are attacked after every shooting. So are radio and tv shows that fire up people. So are forums, blogs, twitter and facebook postings.
Our society embraces venting and sharing our displeasure and hatred of things. It is profitble on tv and radio. Like guns we cannot keep the unhealthy minds from reading or hearing things and being influenced to take action.

Video games, tv, movies and music have been and continue to get hit with regulations, restrictions, and bans. And they have the same amendment rights that guns have. Those are consitutional rights also.
It is like we are becoming a totalitarian state...the government has total control. They nanny us. They provide for the poor and coddle the wealthy with breaks and cuts. The nanny state will also protect us from ourselves by telling us what foods we cannot eat, what we cannot use to cokk food with, restrict and regulate food, restrict and regulate guns & tobacco , tv, movies, radio, adult material, music, sex, art, books, child bearing and abortion, religion or no religion in schools, redefine marriage, etc. Less choice--more regulations and restrictions. Total control. 

I worked a apocolypse party last night. Over 1000 people. Only the security were allowed to carry. They were telling me to tell my medical staff this and I told them that they can consider all the medical staff as security because we were all armed and staying that way. He said "works for me" and walked off.



__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #78 
However, we may be close to eliminating the twinkie.
__________________
President Obama kept Republicans out of the White House for 8 years and added two excellent justices to the Supreme Court.  Those two things alone make him one of our greatest Presidents of my lifetime.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,784
Reply with quote  #79 
Fascinating how 12 years ago Dems were in favor of guns in schools to protect students.

http://nation.foxnews.com/bill-clinton/2012/12/22/flashback-president-clinton-asks-60-million-cops-schools-program

__________________
#MakeDCListen #End Socialism #NoDems #2016 #ForAmerica
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #80 
Let's be real.....the instraments of death will get the lion's share of the blame because they are directly responsible. The mental and social reasons are debated but argued as reasons someone is crazy enough to grab their weapons and kill....but only in rare occations has killer said they got the idea from a video game, movie, tv show, book, radio host, or because they were motivated to take action by what they heard on political tv shows. And since many kill themselves too it is just deflecting blame (valid deflection or otherwise). Bad childhood, lost job, abused by relatives, bullied at school, cut from sports team, person broke up with or asked for divorce, etc. are also causes.

Realize that the same video games, tv shows, movies, books, etc. are all over the world so if they cause problems those problems would occur worldwide...but they don't. Many video games are watered down version of games from japan, korea, etc...The only argument would be one that is simular to "drinking and driving". Gun culture does not mix with violent tv shows, video games, books, or tv shows that fire up or enrage a person to the point of wanting to go do something violent. We would have to remove the first amendment to keep the 2nd amendment safely.

Just like politics....whatever we support we follow. The video game community was hit with proposed new legislation first after the killings. Video game tv channels and sites were talking about it. Here is a headline---
After Newtown Massacre, Video Games Legislation Beats Gun Control Bills To Congress

Sen. Jay Rockefeller introduced legislation in the Senate “to arrange for the National Academy of Sciences to study the impact of violent video games and violent programming on children.”
...............

They mean to say "impact on american children" because every nation is different and every culture andsociety is different. Different gun control, different rights, different economy, different politics. As I posted before--you can't compare 2 countries with vastly different politics, population, rights, etc. and expect same gun control laws to work. The USA was discovered with guns in 1620, founded with guns in 1776, and will always have guns. They are part of our history and culture. We have never not had guns as a country and never will.

__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,784
Reply with quote  #81 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachB25
fhoenix, seriously?  I would bet the percentages of mention for gun legislation versus video game is 100-1.  I have yet to see any outrage on the main stream stations at all concerning TV, Movies and Video Games.  


Shocking that the media conglomerates aren't complaining about their own products.

__________________
#MakeDCListen #End Socialism #NoDems #2016 #ForAmerica
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,784
Reply with quote  #82 
Has anybody mentioned VaTech had a police station on campus yet? No guns. Gun Free Zone.
Ft. Hood? Gun Free Zone.
These mass murderers might be crazy but they aren't stupid.

More on video games, a 7th grader has started a drive to collect all the violent games and dispose of them. Too late?

__________________
#MakeDCListen #End Socialism #NoDems #2016 #ForAmerica
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #83 
I mentioned this to someone yesterday...
We have guns at our home but no one can just walk up to my house and walk in, nor kick in the window without getting past security and locks, setting off alarms, my dogs going towards the noise, and other security.
If someone could just walk into my house while I am home without me knowing they could shoot me while i was in bathroom, cooking, sleeping, bathing, watching tv, on computer, etc....I have to be aware of a situation to arm myself for it.....therefore I have to have security as thefirst layer of protection. Prevent easy access. The security to stop someone from getting in or notify immediately if someone does....followed by an armed response to said security being breached. Security first. Armed response follows.

What has happened to security at schools?
For the 4th time I will say it---No person should be able to drive up to a school and walk in. Period. Even armed guards can be shot first by an armed man walking in guns blazing if he is allowed to walk in.
We need both. Period. Security to prevent entry and armed guards to deal with someone that breaches security. We have better protection for strippers than children in many schools. And the safest neighborhoods are the ones that are easiest. Less crime means less security needed has always been the logic. Bad neighborhood schools and businesses are fenced in, have alarms, metal detectors, armed security, cameras, motion detectors on windows, etc. because they expect violence. They deal with gang members shooting each other. They have had it before and expect it again. They have security to prevent ease of access, prevent any firearms from getting into the school, and an armed response to the access being breached. 
Every school should be difficult to just walk into or beak into during school hours. 

__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 9,784
Reply with quote  #84 
NRA came out strong for intelligent school design. Libs don't want to listen because it's the NRA. That's about as close-minded as you can get.

__________________
#MakeDCListen #End Socialism #NoDems #2016 #ForAmerica
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #85 
Believe me, most liberals will listen to anything that will make society safer.  That said, not sure what any other potential solutions have to do with a willingness to vote on some gun legislation.  Let's vote and see where we stand as American citizens and continue forward from there.
__________________
President Obama kept Republicans out of the White House for 8 years and added two excellent justices to the Supreme Court.  Those two things alone make him one of our greatest Presidents of my lifetime.
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,124
Reply with quote  #86 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverInBlue
Fascinating how 12 years ago Dems were in favor of guns in schools to protect students. http://nation.foxnews.com/bill-clinton/2012/12/22/flashback-president-clinton-asks-60-million-cops-schools-program


The liberal response -

Confused and Crazed Conservatives Distort Clinton’s COPS Program to Help the NRA


Breitbart.com has the conservatives super confused again. This time it’s writer John Nolte, seeking to justify the NRA’s jumping-the-shark presseryesterday. How can anyone justify that, you ask? Well, he’s claiming that President Clinton put cops in school and there’s no difference between what Clinton did and what LaPierre offered up as the corporate agenda NRA’s vision for America, so how dare the media act as if Wayne LaPierre sounded crazy.

In a paranoid rant about how the media is attacking LaPierre’s “attractive” idea of arming up our schools, Nolte hyperventilates:

In their zeal to rampage this left-wing agenda, the media has apparently forgotten that back in 2000, on the one-year anniversary of the Columbine shooting (which occurred with an assault weapons ban in place), President Clinton requested $60 million in federal money to fund a fifth round of funding for a program called “COPS in School,” a program that does exactly what the NRA is proposing and the media is currently in overdrive mocking.

It’s as if he doesn’t realize that that program was already in effect, and what that program did, and who tried to shut it down.

He even quotes Clinton and this does not raise the alarm bell for him that he might be missing something:

“Already, it has placed 2,200 officers in more than 1,000 communities across our nation, where they are heightening school safety as well as coaching sports and acting as mentors and mediators for kids in need,” Clinton said.

School safety and coaching sports! Curse the evil media that ignores the hypocrisy!

Clinton’s 1994 COPS (Community Oriented Policing Services) program, which Republicans tried to kill in 1995 and Bush defunded, was not about cops carrying armed weapons into schools. It was part of a broader approach to decrease crime rates by getting police involved in their communities. In other words, it was a sane policy.

MSNBC explained, “The original Clinton plan, enacted as part of a crime bill in 1994, envisioned hiring 100,000 police officers who would walk the streets, visit the schools and get to know the communities they were policing. The federal government paid 75 percent of the cost for three years, with a salary and benefit cap of $75,000 per officer.”

It also included money for police departments to buy computers and other new equipment. Note: No one was paying the NRA with taxpayer money to train armed police in order to patrol our schools. It’s a shame that Nolte missed that part, because that part contributed to LaPierre appearing like a cold-hearted, greedy, out-of-touch man whose relationship with reality is now in question.

Of course, Republicans were against Clinton’s COPS program back then. Sigh. Republicans preferred to focus on punishing crimes and claimed to have issue with the federal government having any say over local government. It was a waste of money, they cried! They felt so strongly about this that it contributed to (prepare for déjà vu) their shut down of government. Of course, the current proposal by the NRA (R-nationwide) is estimated to cost around $5.4 billion. This from the “fiscal hawks” who just hightailed it out of congress after failing to pass a budget plan out of alleged concern over spending.

Obama started funding the COPS program again via the stimulus, at a time when police departments couldn’t afford to keep fully staffed.

Not surprisingly, “community policing” was acknowledged to mean the opposite of Breitbart writer’s take on it.

Milwaukee police chief Edward Flynn said that while the politics has centered mostly on the hiring program, “the great value of the COPS program was on the educational side.”
The money for new officers was the hook, he said, but the notion of close engagement with neighbors “was a critical development in the evolution of policing in American cities,” helping drive down crime while boosting community trust.

Indeed, when a conservative criticized it in 2001, he scoffed that it was feel good liberal bs that we couldn’t afford, especially since some of the funds went to “… Department of Natural Resources officers whose duties include teaching children how to fish and putting up deer crossing signs along highways.” Yeah, teaching what I assume were at-risk youths how to fish is almost like assault weapon carrying police stalking the hallways of our preschools in order to enrich the NRA in both weapon purchases and “training” they’ve suggested they be in charge of, but not.

The purpose of COPS was to get police out from behind their desks and engaged in their communities, in order to foster trust on both sides. Furthermore, if LaPierre hasn’t lost it completely, we have to assume he wants these armed Blackwater types armed with assault weapons, because after all, “bad guys” have them.

In case Nolte is still confused,on December 19th Senator Boxer (D-CA) introduced the School Safety Enhancements Act, which would strengthen and expand the Justice Department’s existing COPS Secure Our Schools grants program to provide schools with more resources to install tip lines, surveillance equipment, secured entrances and other important safety measures. Clearly COPS falls short of LaPierre’s Mad Max vision.

According to Nolte, this is a big media conspiracy so the media – yes, the media – can take our guns and give Obama another “win”.

Dizzying desperation.


__________________
“The hand of help has no color. The face of caring has no shape. The language of love has no accent.” - Unattributed
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,347
Reply with quote  #87 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoiseyGuy
Diet Coke - I read and then studied your post, and it contains almost everything I have to say about gun control, and I do believe that the Mandarin-Navajo first premise argument is a realistic one.     Frank
PS - I believe that all weapons types should be examined carefully and each then evaluated in terms of individual need and purpose, and also protection departmental (police) need and purpose, as well as the military.  I believe the same should be done with types of ammunition.  Then appropriateness of sale to the general public can be assessed and enforced despite the NRA financial lobby.  Woody - I love your statement that a gun weighs less than a cop, but is your gun appropriate for your needs and purposes?  Do you need a howitzer because you live "in the country" or would a handgun suffice?


JG, an AR-15 is a stable weapons, platform that I, and many others would consider to be a Repel weapon, as opposed to the the assault weapon handle you, and the Liberal Media would apply. The fact that law abiding Americans can posses such power, somehow upsets those that prefer an overpowering,centralized government. Why is that??

__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #88 
I'll stick my toe into this conversation simply to get clarification on some of these various positions.  A hand grenade, like assault or semi-assault weapons, would be a particularly good weapon for repel purposes so I ask, should hand grenades be included among the arms we have a right to bear?
__________________
President Obama kept Republicans out of the White House for 8 years and added two excellent justices to the Supreme Court.  Those two things alone make him one of our greatest Presidents of my lifetime.
BillSmith

Registered:
Posts: 6,562
Reply with quote  #89 

Grenades would fall into the same category as a full-auto weapon.

Two issues at work here:

1) Is it realistic to provide schools the same level of security as our airports?

2) What weaponary is to be available to the average citizen, thereby meeting the constitutional right to bear arms?


To the first question, it has been well documented the gunman in Conneticut was a son of a teacher at the school where the shooting occured. He could be expected he would have had casual access.

To the second, law abiding citizens should be able to own lethal arms. Every attempt to reduce the lethality makes their available choices less effective.


__________________
Bill Smith
West Bay Nuggets
NorCal Women's Fastpitch Summer League
info: nuggetsoftball@aol.com

Sometimes you are the mole, sometimes the mushroom.
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 4,948
Reply with quote  #90 
Need both layers of protection.....like our homes. One does not work without the other. A person committing a crime can work around one but not both.
Security to keep someone from just walking in/breaking in unannounced, and armed guards to deal with whomever got thru security.
Security cameras show a guy in the parking lot getting out of his car with a rifle. Security notifies everyone, rooms are locked down, and armed security is sent to deal with the person as they go to kick in a window BEFORE they even get into the school. Without security alerting of intruders an armed person can shoot and kill many before armed security get to him and stop him. Armed guards can't be everywhere at once and most shooters know where guards will be when they strike places with armed guards. But they cannot get thru security cameras, alarms, locks, and armed guards responding to exactly where they see they are outside the school. Stop the enemies at the gate.

At columbine the armed and unarmed were at opposite end of school. Sheriff deputy Neil Gardner was at the school watching the smoking pit area where students go to smoke. He was shot at as he approached the area with the shooters and shot back but didn't hit. Without security to notify of anyone approaching the school from the parking lot the armed guards may not be where they are needed until the shooters begin their rampage. This is why we need both forms of security like airports, bars, etc. Prevent the killer from getting into the school. Once inside he can kill before even an armed guard takes him down. And what about 2 or more killers? What about killers at different areas at once? Security to spot who, what, when, and where is approaching the school to come in...and armed guards to deal with the intruders exactly where they are coming in.


__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation: