Mass shootings in America have become something of a national past time. A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people. In 2008 America had over 12,000 deaths at the end of a firearm, compared to 11 in Japan, skew for population ratios and it’s still a massively high number.
I was watching CNN’s Piers Morgan’s exchange with Alex Jones the other night, it was crazy (see below for yourself). More minutes of my life wasted watching my fellow Americans continue to spiral into the polarized black hole that has become the gun debate in the US. Congrats to CNN for increasing their ratings, make no mistake that Piers’s producers knew exactly what they were doing, and what they would get with Alex Jones. Be careful what you wish for Piers..
Mass shootings with “Active Shooters” is a problem we can’t ignore any longer. I for one am willing to take a leadership role on the issue.
America’s culture is rooted in gun ownership. I’m a gun owner and enjoy shooting with my son in a safe controlled environment. I personally wouldn’t have taught him firearms safety at such a young age if given the option. However, America is rooted in gun ownership culture I thought it best to drive home firearms safety and the responsibility that comes with handling firearms. His mother and I did decide to take away all his violent shooting video games, not a good thing for a ten year old to practice taking head shots, and this could potentially lead to mental health issues, better safe than sorry I say.
I don’t have all the solutions on this issue but I do know that I’m personally ready to compromise to limit mass shootings, and I’m ready to have an intelligent conversation on this issue. If leading gun organizations like the NRA don’t take a leadership role in proposing realistic solutions, then they will have failed to truly represent gun owners. The result will be that politicians will end up passing more ridiculous laws that don’t make sense for anyone. The issue is cultural also, you can’t just go after gun control. Most silly laws passed, especially magazine limitations. It’s like trying to get rid of drunk drivers by shrinking the size of gas tanks in cars. Yes, it really is that silly.
Sometimes change, and healthy debate, as difficult as it can be at first, is a good thing. After all it was once within our constitutional rights to own and enslave other human beings. I believe in the 2nd Amendment and our right to bear arms but, if we continue to do nothing on the issue (mainly a mental health one) of mass shootings then we can expect more of them in the near future. Remember that when you kiss your kids goodbye on their way to school.
LewisC
I don’t know what the answer is. The last time the federal government forayed into gun control, Waco/AR ban and OKC retaliation, hundreds died. I don’t want that and it will be worse, I think. No offense meant, just being honest.
LewisC
I don’t know what the answer is. The last time the federal government forayed into gun control, Waco/AR ban and OKC retaliation, hundreds died. I don’t want that and it will be worse, I think. No offense meant, just being honest.
LewisC
I don’t know what the answer is. The last time the federal government forayed into gun control, Waco/AR ban and OKC retaliation, hundreds died. I don’t want that and it will be worse, I think. No offense meant, just being honest.
LewisC
I don’t know what the answer is. The last time the federal government forayed into gun control, Waco/AR ban and OKC retaliation, hundreds died. I don’t want that and it will be worse, I think. No offense meant, just being honest.
Muskrat
I could not agree more Brandon. You and Mike Ritland have the right ideas. Good luck to all us law-abiding citizens, we’re going to need it.
Muskrat
I could not agree more Brandon. You and Mike Ritland have the right ideas. Good luck to all us law-abiding citizens, we’re going to need it.
Muskrat
I could not agree more Brandon. You and Mike Ritland have the right ideas. Good luck to all us law-abiding citizens, we’re going to need it.
Muskrat
I could not agree more Brandon. You and Mike Ritland have the right ideas. Good luck to all us law-abiding citizens, we’re going to need it.
NaikalaniDDeCosta
BW r u live
NaikalaniDDeCosta
BW r u live
NaikalaniDDeCosta
BW r u live
NaikalaniDDeCosta
BW r u live
Scubadive
Mass shooting are at the lowest point in American history, murders are down, violent crime per 100,000 ppl is 466 compared to the UK @ 2,030ish per 100,000 ppl. Out of 8,700+ deaths by guns in 2011 400 were by law enforcement, 266 by law abiding citizens in self defense & 47% or so of the balance was suicide! So let’s have the common sense discussion about gun violence. Bottom line is new laws are like saying we are going to stop drunk driving by making it impossible for sober drivers to buy a car.
Scubadive
Mass shooting are at the lowest point in American history, murders are down, violent crime per 100,000 ppl is 466 compared to the UK @ 2,030ish per 100,000 ppl. Out of 8,700+ deaths by guns in 2011 400 were by law enforcement, 266 by law abiding citizens in self defense & 47% or so of the balance was suicide! So let’s have the common sense discussion about gun violence. Bottom line is new laws are like saying we are going to stop drunk driving by making it impossible for sober drivers to buy a car.
Scubadive
Mass shooting are at the lowest point in American history, murders are down, violent crime per 100,000 ppl is 466 compared to the UK @ 2,030ish per 100,000 ppl. Out of 8,700+ deaths by guns in 2011 400 were by law enforcement, 266 by law abiding citizens in self defense & 47% or so of the balance was suicide! So let’s have the common sense discussion about gun violence. Bottom line is new laws are like saying we are going to stop drunk driving by making it impossible for sober drivers to buy a car.
Scubadive
Mass shooting are at the lowest point in American history, murders are down, violent crime per 100,000 ppl is 466 compared to the UK @ 2,030ish per 100,000 ppl. Out of 8,700+ deaths by guns in 2011 400 were by law enforcement, 266 by law abiding citizens in self defense & 47% or so of the balance was suicide! So let’s have the common sense discussion about gun violence. Bottom line is new laws are like saying we are going to stop drunk driving by making it impossible for sober drivers to buy a car.
BadfishRanch
Don’t forget to take the balance of your # and subtract all the gang on gang and drug trade related gun deaths, it leaves very little. Truth is we have a drug problem in the USA, so they made it illegal and……………..
BadfishRanch
Don’t forget to take the balance of your # and subtract all the gang on gang and drug trade related gun deaths, it leaves very little. Truth is we have a drug problem in the USA, so they made it illegal and……………..
BadfishRanch
Don’t forget to take the balance of your # and subtract all the gang on gang and drug trade related gun deaths, it leaves very little. Truth is we have a drug problem in the USA, so they made it illegal and……………..
BadfishRanch
Don’t forget to take the balance of your # and subtract all the gang on gang and drug trade related gun deaths, it leaves very little. Truth is we have a drug problem in the USA, so they made it illegal and……………..
SEAN SPOONTS
Point taken Chief, but I think the reasonable measures you might image with respect to guns would run up against the unreason of the gun banners who aren’t as interested in controlling crime as they seem to be in controlling regular people. What might seem reasonable to you would strike them as not going near far enough. On the pro-self defense side you have the argument that mentally unstable people should not be getting guns. On the anti-self defense side you have people who think everyone with a gun is mentally unstable. They look at the issue from totally different perspectives.
Your point about the difference in murder rates in counties like Japan is often made by people on both sides. I’ve looked at those numbers myself for years and I’ve come to a simple conclusion; Americans are not like Japanese or like the British or like the Swiss. One hundred years ago you could walk into a hardware store in London, buy shotgun and walk home with it on your shoulder. And the UK still had a lower murder rate by firearms than the U.S. even then. Brits are Brits and Yanks are Yanks. Tighter gun laws won’t pacify Americans the way 4,000 years of head chopping Shoguns and serfdom have pacified the Japanese.
Finally, I agree with you on the Piers Morgan exchange with Alex Jones who makes Jesse Ventura look rational. Jones is the absolute worst representative of the pro-Self Defense side anyone could imagine which is one of the reasons they put him on the air(recalling the Left’s general attitude that only crazy people have guns). Jone’s publicity stunt petition to get Morgan deported(as if we stil had an Aliens and Sedition Act on the books) helps him sell books and videos to the conspiracy minded loons who hang on his every word.
SEAN SPOONTS(MAFIA)
Point taken Chief, but I think the reasonable measures you might image with respect to guns would run up against the unreason of the gun banners who aren’t as interested in controlling crime as they seem to be in controlling regular people. What might seem reasonable to you would strike them as not going near far enough. On the pro-self defense side you have the argument that mentally unstable people should not be getting guns. On the anti-self defense side you have people who think everyone with a gun is mentally unstable. They look at the issue from totally different perspectives.
Your point about the difference in murder rates in counties like Japan is often made by people on both sides. I’ve looked at those numbers myself for years and I’ve come to a simple conclusion; Americans are not like Japanese or like the British or like the Swiss. One hundred years ago you could walk into a hardware store in London, buy shotgun and walk home with it on your shoulder. And the UK still had a lower murder rate by firearms than the U.S. even then. Brits are Brits and Yanks are Yanks. Tighter gun laws won’t pacify Americans the way 4,000 years of head chopping Shoguns and serfdom have pacified the Japanese.
Finally, I agree with you on the Piers Morgan exchange with Alex Jones who makes Jesse Ventura look rational. Jones is the absolute worst representative of the pro-Self Defense side anyone could imagine which is one of the reasons they put him on the air(recalling the Left’s general attitude that only crazy people have guns). Jone’s publicity stunt petition to get Morgan deported(as if we stil had an Aliens and Sedition Act on the books) helps him sell books and videos to the conspiracy minded loons who hang on his every word.
SEAN SPOONTS
Point taken Chief, but I think the reasonable measures you might image with respect to guns would run up against the unreason of the gun banners who aren’t as interested in controlling crime as they seem to be in controlling regular people. What might seem reasonable to you would strike them as not going near far enough. On the pro-self defense side you have the argument that mentally unstable people should not be getting guns. On the anti-self defense side you have people who think everyone with a gun is mentally unstable. They look at the issue from totally different perspectives.
Your point about the difference in murder rates in counties like Japan is often made by people on both sides. I’ve looked at those numbers myself for years and I’ve come to a simple conclusion; Americans are not like Japanese or like the British or like the Swiss. One hundred years ago you could walk into a hardware store in London, buy shotgun and walk home with it on your shoulder. And the UK still had a lower murder rate by firearms than the U.S. even then. Brits are Brits and Yanks are Yanks. Tighter gun laws won’t pacify Americans the way 4,000 years of head chopping Shoguns and serfdom have pacified the Japanese.
Finally, I agree with you on the Piers Morgan exchange with Alex Jones who makes Jesse Ventura look rational. Jones is the absolute worst representative of the pro-Self Defense side anyone could imagine which is one of the reasons they put him on the air(recalling the Left’s general attitude that only crazy people have guns). Jone’s publicity stunt petition to get Morgan deported(as if we stil had an Aliens and Sedition Act on the books) helps him sell books and videos to the conspiracy minded loons who hang on his every word.
SEAN SPOONTS(MAFIA)
Point taken Chief, but I think the reasonable measures you might image with respect to guns would run up against the unreason of the gun banners who aren’t as interested in controlling crime as they seem to be in controlling regular people. What might seem reasonable to you would strike them as not going near far enough. On the pro-self defense side you have the argument that mentally unstable people should not be getting guns. On the anti-self defense side you have people who think everyone with a gun is mentally unstable. They look at the issue from totally different perspectives.
Your point about the difference in murder rates in counties like Japan is often made by people on both sides. I’ve looked at those numbers myself for years and I’ve come to a simple conclusion; Americans are not like Japanese or like the British or like the Swiss. One hundred years ago you could walk into a hardware store in London, buy shotgun and walk home with it on your shoulder. And the UK still had a lower murder rate by firearms than the U.S. even then. Brits are Brits and Yanks are Yanks. Tighter gun laws won’t pacify Americans the way 4,000 years of head chopping Shoguns and serfdom have pacified the Japanese.
Finally, I agree with you on the Piers Morgan exchange with Alex Jones who makes Jesse Ventura look rational. Jones is the absolute worst representative of the pro-Self Defense side anyone could imagine which is one of the reasons they put him on the air(recalling the Left’s general attitude that only crazy people have guns). Jone’s publicity stunt petition to get Morgan deported(as if we stil had an Aliens and Sedition Act on the books) helps him sell books and videos to the conspiracy minded loons who hang on his every word.
SEAN SPOONTS
@BadfishRanch I’ve always thought it was interesting that the same people who believe making gun ownership illegal will stop gun murders also want to make drugs legal arguing that the laws forbidding them don’t work.
SEAN SPOONTS(MAFIA)
@BadfishRanch I’ve always thought it was interesting that the same people who believe making gun ownership illegal will stop gun murders also want to make drugs legal arguing that the laws forbidding them don’t work.
SEAN SPOONTS
@BadfishRanch I’ve always thought it was interesting that the same people who believe making gun ownership illegal will stop gun murders also want to make drugs legal arguing that the laws forbidding them don’t work.
SEAN SPOONTS(MAFIA)
@BadfishRanch I’ve always thought it was interesting that the same people who believe making gun ownership illegal will stop gun murders also want to make drugs legal arguing that the laws forbidding them don’t work.
Scubadive
I agree Sean & Badfish; however, I would add that we have a parent problem in this country. If we had active mothers & especially FATHERS training kids to have character, a work ethic, and making good decisions…….I’m betting we wouldn’t have the level of issues we have today. Kids are lost, they aren’t being taught the think critically, to care for others, that life is valuable, & that bad actions have consequences. We are seeing a generation of lazy, entitled, don’t care about anyone but themselves kids & on top of it the schools & universities are teaching a negative history about this country, that socialism is a viable option, ect…I say all that to say this….We have a HEART problem in this country. We need a fundimental shift in what kids are taught & the value of another person & the value of themselves. We have lost our God perspective.
Scubadive
I agree Sean & Badfish; however, I would add that we have a parent problem in this country. If we had active mothers & especially FATHERS training kids to have character, a work ethic, and making good decisions…….I’m betting we wouldn’t have the level of issues we have today. Kids are lost, they aren’t being taught the think critically, to care for others, that life is valuable, & that bad actions have consequences. We are seeing a generation of lazy, entitled, don’t care about anyone but themselves kids & on top of it the schools & universities are teaching a negative history about this country, that socialism is a viable option, ect…I say all that to say this….We have a HEART problem in this country. We need a fundimental shift in what kids are taught & the value of another person & the value of themselves. We have lost our God perspective.
Scubadive
I agree Sean & Badfish; however, I would add that we have a parent problem in this country. If we had active mothers & especially FATHERS training kids to have character, a work ethic, and making good decisions…….I’m betting we wouldn’t have the level of issues we have today. Kids are lost, they aren’t being taught the think critically, to care for others, that life is valuable, & that bad actions have consequences. We are seeing a generation of lazy, entitled, don’t care about anyone but themselves kids & on top of it the schools & universities are teaching a negative history about this country, that socialism is a viable option, ect…I say all that to say this….We have a HEART problem in this country. We need a fundimental shift in what kids are taught & the value of another person & the value of themselves. We have lost our God perspective.
Scubadive
I agree Sean & Badfish; however, I would add that we have a parent problem in this country. If we had active mothers & especially FATHERS training kids to have character, a work ethic, and making good decisions…….I’m betting we wouldn’t have the level of issues we have today. Kids are lost, they aren’t being taught the think critically, to care for others, that life is valuable, & that bad actions have consequences. We are seeing a generation of lazy, entitled, don’t care about anyone but themselves kids & on top of it the schools & universities are teaching a negative history about this country, that socialism is a viable option, ect…I say all that to say this….We have a HEART problem in this country. We need a fundimental shift in what kids are taught & the value of another person & the value of themselves. We have lost our God perspective.
dbowhunter
Gun Control is Amoral. Gun laws are not about saving lives. Children’s lives. The mass shooting ‘problem’, and most other issues in the country, are a societal problem as you indicated in your opening paragraph.
“A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.”
You cannot restrict the free exercise of liberty of innocent, lawful adults because of the actions of other, sick people. And I mean sick as in mentally ill/confused. In a society that devalues personal accomplishment, individual action, pure virtuous life, selfless personal charity, civility, free thinking, self improvement, and moral and religous convictions in exchange for group think, collectivism, agnostic views, forced redistribution, incivility, medication, plundering others for selfish gain and unnatural physical acts; amoral. horrible, reprehensible things happen. The things are no amoral, horrible, or reprehensible as the societal ideals that lead to them.
This problem will be fixed in american homes and only in american homes, with a basis in strong moral principles and values and an education and enlightenment in the proper ideals of mankind. You can legislate someone into sanity, civility, enlightenment, or moral thinking. Unfortunately this ‘problem’ will not be solved until individuals escept that personal responsibility.
The past that most liekly will be chosen instead is sacrifice rights and liberty for perceived safety and security, which instead leads to serfdom, despotism, and tyranny. Good luck along that road, as strong principaled men like yourself will be needed to make the right decisions in home and in the public arena after they (you) recover from these moments of flippancy.
A good, semi-related piece below.
With Gun Control, Cost Benefit Analysis Is Amoral
http://www.forbes.com/sites/harrybinswanger/2013/01/01/with-gun-control-cost-benefit-analysis-is-amoral/
dbowhunter
Gun Control is Amoral. Gun laws are not about saving lives. Children’s lives. The mass shooting ‘problem’, and most other issues in the country, are a societal problem as you indicated in your opening paragraph.
“A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.”
You cannot restrict the free exercise of liberty of innocent, lawful adults because of the actions of other, sick people. And I mean sick as in mentally ill/confused. In a society that devalues personal accomplishment, individual action, pure virtuous life, selfless personal charity, civility, free thinking, self improvement, and moral and religous convictions in exchange for group think, collectivism, agnostic views, forced redistribution, incivility, medication, plundering others for selfish gain and unnatural physical acts; amoral. horrible, reprehensible things happen. The things are no amoral, horrible, or reprehensible as the societal ideals that lead to them.
This problem will be fixed in american homes and only in american homes, with a basis in strong moral principles and values and an education and enlightenment in the proper ideals of mankind. You can legislate someone into sanity, civility, enlightenment, or moral thinking. Unfortunately this ‘problem’ will not be solved until individuals escept that personal responsibility.
The past that most liekly will be chosen instead is sacrifice rights and liberty for perceived safety and security, which instead leads to serfdom, despotism, and tyranny. Good luck along that road, as strong principaled men like yourself will be needed to make the right decisions in home and in the public arena after they (you) recover from these moments of flippancy.
A good, semi-related piece below.
With Gun Control, Cost Benefit Analysis Is Amoral
http://www.forbes.com/sites/harrybinswanger/2013/01/01/with-gun-control-cost-benefit-analysis-is-amoral/
dbowhunter
Gun Control is Amoral. Gun laws are not about saving lives. Children’s lives. The mass shooting ‘problem’, and most other issues in the country, are a societal problem as you indicated in your opening paragraph. “A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.” You cannot restrict the free exercise of liberty of innocent, lawful adults because of the actions of other, sick people. And I mean sick, as in mentally ill/confused. In a society that devalues personal accomplishment, individual action, pure virtuous life, selfless personal charity, civility, free thinking, self improvement, and moral and religous convictions in exchange for group think, collectivism, agnostic views, forced redistribution, incivility, medication, plundering others for selfish gain and unnatural physical acts; amoral. horrible, reprehensible things happen. The things are no more amoral, horrible, or reprehensible as the societal ideals that lead to them. This problem will be fixed in american homes and only in american homes, with a basis in strong moral principles and values and an education and enlightenment in the proper ideals of mankind. You can legislate someone into sanity, civility, enlightenment, or moral thinking. Unfortunately this ‘problem’ will not be solved until individuals accept that personal responsibility. The past that most likely will be chosen instead is to sacrifice rights and liberty for perceived safety and security, which instead leads to serfdom, despotism, and tyranny. Good luck along that road, as strong principled men like yourself will be needed to make the right decisions in home and in the public arena after they recover from these moments of flippancy. A good, semi-related piece below. “With Gun Control, Cost Benefit Analysis Is Amoral” http://www.forbes.com/sites/harrybinswanger/2013/01/01/with-gun-control-cost-benefit-analysis-is-amoral/
dbowhunter
Gun Control is Amoral. Gun laws are not about saving lives. Children’s lives. The mass shooting ‘problem’, and most other issues in the country, are a societal problem as you indicated in your opening paragraph. “A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.” You cannot restrict the free exercise of liberty of innocent, lawful adults because of the actions of other, sick people. And I mean sick, as in mentally ill/confused. In a society that devalues personal accomplishment, individual action, pure virtuous life, selfless personal charity, civility, free thinking, self improvement, and moral and religous convictions in exchange for group think, collectivism, agnostic views, forced redistribution, incivility, medication, plundering others for selfish gain and unnatural physical acts; amoral. horrible, reprehensible things happen. The things are no more amoral, horrible, or reprehensible as the societal ideals that lead to them. This problem will be fixed in american homes and only in american homes, with a basis in strong moral principles and values and an education and enlightenment in the proper ideals of mankind. You can legislate someone into sanity, civility, enlightenment, or moral thinking. Unfortunately this ‘problem’ will not be solved until individuals accept that personal responsibility. The past that most likely will be chosen instead is to sacrifice rights and liberty for perceived safety and security, which instead leads to serfdom, despotism, and tyranny. Good luck along that road, as strong principled men like yourself will be needed to make the right decisions in home and in the public arena after they recover from these moments of flippancy. A good, semi-related piece below. “With Gun Control, Cost Benefit Analysis Is Amoral” http://www.forbes.com/sites/harrybinswanger/2013/01/01/with-gun-control-cost-benefit-analysis-is-amoral/
dbowhunter
Gun Control is Amoral. Gun laws are not about saving lives. Children’s lives. The mass shooting ‘problem’, and most other issues in the country, are a societal problem as you indicated in your opening paragraph. “A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.” You cannot restrict the free exercise of liberty of innocent, lawful adults because of the actions of other, sick people. And I mean sick, as in mentally ill/confused. In a society that devalues personal accomplishment, individual action, pure virtuous life, selfless personal charity, civility, free thinking, self improvement, and moral and religous convictions in exchange for group think, collectivism, agnostic views, forced redistribution, incivility, medication, plundering others for selfish gain and unnatural physical acts; amoral. horrible, reprehensible things happen. The things are no more amoral, horrible, or reprehensible as the societal ideals that lead to them. This problem will be fixed in american homes and only in american homes, with a basis in strong moral principles and values and an education and enlightenment in the proper ideals of mankind. You can legislate someone into sanity, civility, enlightenment, or moral thinking. Unfortunately this ‘problem’ will not be solved until individuals accept that personal responsibility. The past that most likely will be chosen instead is to sacrifice rights and liberty for perceived safety and security, which instead leads to serfdom, despotism, and tyranny. Good luck along that road, as strong principled men like yourself will be needed to make the right decisions in home and in the public arena after they recover from these moments of flippancy. A good, semi-related piece below. “With Gun Control, Cost Benefit Analysis Is Amoral” http://www.forbes.com/sites/harrybinswanger/2013/01/01/with-gun-control-cost-benefit-analysis-is-amoral/
dbowhunter
Gun Control is Amoral. Gun laws are not about saving lives. Children’s lives. The mass shooting ‘problem’, and most other issues in the country, are a societal problem as you indicated in your opening paragraph. “A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.” You cannot restrict the free exercise of liberty of innocent, lawful adults because of the actions of other, sick people. And I mean sick, as in mentally ill/confused. In a society that devalues personal accomplishment, individual action, pure virtuous life, selfless personal charity, civility, free thinking, self improvement, and moral and religous convictions in exchange for group think, collectivism, agnostic views, forced redistribution, incivility, medication, plundering others for selfish gain and unnatural physical acts; amoral. horrible, reprehensible things happen. The things are no more amoral, horrible, or reprehensible as the societal ideals that lead to them. This problem will be fixed in american homes and only in american homes, with a basis in strong moral principles and values and an education and enlightenment in the proper ideals of mankind. You can legislate someone into sanity, civility, enlightenment, or moral thinking. Unfortunately this ‘problem’ will not be solved until individuals accept that personal responsibility. The past that most likely will be chosen instead is to sacrifice rights and liberty for perceived safety and security, which instead leads to serfdom, despotism, and tyranny. Good luck along that road, as strong principled men like yourself will be needed to make the right decisions in home and in the public arena after they recover from these moments of flippancy. A good, semi-related piece below. “With Gun Control, Cost Benefit Analysis Is Amoral” http://www.forbes.com/sites/harrybinswanger/2013/01/01/with-gun-control-cost-benefit-analysis-is-amoral/
dbowhunter
I’m sure you expected the push back. But as a friend of mine put it
“The problem is not guns or the volume of guns, it is the necrosis of our culture in general and specifically a systemic failure of morals and the idea that actions have consequences. That being the case, those of us who have escaped this affliction have the moral imperative to preserve the natural right of self preservation and any measure to deny us that right is antithetical not only to the intent of our founding document but to the intent of our creator as well. What I’m saying without being so frickin’ long winded is that I have come to view these usurpers as completely illegitimate and anything that derives from them should be immediately nullified.”
I’ll save you from where it goes fro their, most aren’t ready for that.
dbowhunter
I’m sure you expected the push back. But as a friend of mine put it
“The problem is not guns or the volume of guns, it is the necrosis of our culture in general and specifically a systemic failure of morals and the idea that actions have consequences. That being the case, those of us who have escaped this affliction have the moral imperative to preserve the natural right of self preservation and any measure to deny us that right is antithetical not only to the intent of our founding document but to the intent of our creator as well. What I’m saying without being so frickin’ long winded is that I have come to view these usurpers as completely illegitimate and anything that derives from them should be immediately nullified.”
I’ll save you from where it goes fro their, most aren’t ready for that.
dbowhunter
I’m sure you expected the push back. But as a friend of mine put it
“The problem is not guns or the volume of guns, it is the necrosis of our culture in general and specifically a systemic failure of morals and the idea that actions have consequences. That being the case, those of us who have escaped this affliction have the moral imperative to preserve the natural right of self preservation and any measure to deny us that right is antithetical not only to the intent of our founding document but to the intent of our creator as well. What I’m saying without being so frickin’ long winded is that I have come to view these usurpers as completely illegitimate and anything that derives from them should be immediately nullified.”
I’ll save you from where it goes fro their, most aren’t ready for that.
dbowhunter
I’m sure you expected the push back. But as a friend of mine put it
“The problem is not guns or the volume of guns, it is the necrosis of our culture in general and specifically a systemic failure of morals and the idea that actions have consequences. That being the case, those of us who have escaped this affliction have the moral imperative to preserve the natural right of self preservation and any measure to deny us that right is antithetical not only to the intent of our founding document but to the intent of our creator as well. What I’m saying without being so frickin’ long winded is that I have come to view these usurpers as completely illegitimate and anything that derives from them should be immediately nullified.”
I’ll save you from where it goes fro their, most aren’t ready for that.
flhtse05
I just finsihed reading Grossman’s book, On Combat. In the process of reading his book They’re Taching Our Kids to Kill. We have known for a long time what the real problem is and have done nothing because the cause, holoywood gives huge amounts of money to the political scene. They mkake more money off this than the gun lobby. SCUBA you hit the nail on the head brother!
flhtse05
I just finsihed reading Grossman’s book, On Combat. In the process of reading his book They’re Taching Our Kids to Kill. We have known for a long time what the real problem is and have done nothing because the cause, holoywood gives huge amounts of money to the political scene. They mkake more money off this than the gun lobby. SCUBA you hit the nail on the head brother!
flhtse05
I just finsihed reading Grossman’s book, On Combat. In the process of reading his book They’re Taching Our Kids to Kill. We have known for a long time what the real problem is and have done nothing because the cause, holoywood gives huge amounts of money to the political scene. They mkake more money off this than the gun lobby. SCUBA you hit the nail on the head brother!
flhtse05
I just finsihed reading Grossman’s book, On Combat. In the process of reading his book They’re Taching Our Kids to Kill. We have known for a long time what the real problem is and have done nothing because the cause, holoywood gives huge amounts of money to the political scene. They mkake more money off this than the gun lobby. SCUBA you hit the nail on the head brother!
dbowhunter
Hollywood, like any outside thing (politicians, video games, etc.) are a result of those spending their money and votes there. Hollywood and the video game industry are merely symptoms of the disease. They are providing a product that is in demand, and extremly higih demand, hence the huge sums of money. Until we create individuals no longer interested in sex, drugs and blood, they will continue to be profitable, and cannot be blamed anymore than the gun or bullet.
dbowhunter
Hollywood, like any outside thing (politicians, video games, etc.) are a result of those spending their money and votes there. Hollywood and the video game industry are merely symptoms of the disease. They are providing a product that is in demand, and extremly higih demand, hence the huge sums of money. Until we create individuals no longer interested in sex, drugs and blood, they will continue to be profitable, and cannot be blamed anymore than the gun or bullet.
dbowhunter
Hollywood, like any outside thing (politicians, video games, etc.) are a result of those spending their money and votes there. Hollywood and the video game industry are merely symptoms of the disease. They are providing a product that is in demand, and extremly higih demand, hence the huge sums of money. Until we create individuals no longer interested in sex, drugs and blood, they will continue to be profitable, and cannot be blamed anymore than the gun or bullet.
dbowhunter
Hollywood, like any outside thing (politicians, video games, etc.) are a result of those spending their money and votes there. Hollywood and the video game industry are merely symptoms of the disease. They are providing a product that is in demand, and extremly higih demand, hence the huge sums of money. Until we create individuals no longer interested in sex, drugs and blood, they will continue to be profitable, and cannot be blamed anymore than the gun or bullet.
LCpl X Marine Corps
“If leading gun organizations like the NRA don’t take a leadership role in proposing realistic solutions, then they will have failed to truly represent gun owners. The result will be that politicians will end up passing more ridiculous laws that don’t make sense for anyone.”
I totally agree with this, BW. Remember that article you posted on the Load Out Room re the NRA very early on? There were some good commentary on that article. So, far it’s only been Uri writing something similar on SOFREP, hell it wasn’t even on SOFREP, he posted his article from ITS.
Mark Kelly (Gabby Gifford), Gen. McChrystal, etc. have stated something similar, but no actual actionable ideas that will remain faithful to the 2nd Amend. have been put out.
There’s already been too many for the pro NRA (blaming everything else, but the sheer number of guns in public hands) stance, but not so much the con NRA stance, like yours, Uri’s, etc. can you put out con NRA articles on SOFREP as well to balance things out? Thanks, man.
We need ideas out there (not just from the ‘Obamy’s gonna take my guns’ crowd), and SOFREP can totally lead on this.
LCpl X Marine Corps
“If leading gun organizations like the NRA don’t take a leadership role in proposing realistic solutions, then they will have failed to truly represent gun owners. The result will be that politicians will end up passing more ridiculous laws that don’t make sense for anyone.”
I totally agree with this, BW. Remember that article you posted on the Load Out Room re the NRA very early on? There were some good commentary on that article. So, far it’s only been Uri writing something similar on SOFREP, hell it wasn’t even on SOFREP, he posted his article from ITS.
Mark Kelly (Gabby Gifford), Gen. McChrystal, etc. have stated something similar, but no actual actionable ideas that will remain faithful to the 2nd Amend. have been put out.
There’s already been too many for the pro NRA (blaming everything else, but the sheer number of guns in public hands) stance, but not so much the con NRA stance, like yours, Uri’s, etc. can you put out con NRA articles on SOFREP as well to balance things out? Thanks, man.
We need ideas out there (not just from the ‘Obamy’s gonna take my guns’ crowd), and SOFREP can totally lead on this.
LCpl X Marine Corps
“If leading gun organizations like the NRA don’t take a leadership role in proposing realistic solutions, then they will have failed to truly represent gun owners. The result will be that politicians will end up passing more ridiculous laws that don’t make sense for anyone.”
I totally agree with this, BW. Remember that article you posted on the Load Out Room re the NRA very early on? There were some good commentary on that article. So, far it’s only been Uri writing something similar on SOFREP, hell it wasn’t even on SOFREP, he posted his article from ITS.
Mark Kelly (Gabby Gifford), Gen. McChrystal, etc. have stated something similar, but no actual actionable ideas that will remain faithful to the 2nd Amend. have been put out.
There’s already been too many for the pro NRA (blaming everything else, but the sheer number of guns in public hands) stance, but not so much the con NRA stance, like yours, Uri’s, etc. can you put out con NRA articles on SOFREP as well to balance things out? Thanks, man.
We need ideas out there (not just from the ‘Obamy’s gonna take my guns’ crowd), and SOFREP can totally lead on this.
LCpl X Marine Corps
“If leading gun organizations like the NRA don’t take a leadership role in proposing realistic solutions, then they will have failed to truly represent gun owners. The result will be that politicians will end up passing more ridiculous laws that don’t make sense for anyone.”
I totally agree with this, BW. Remember that article you posted on the Load Out Room re the NRA very early on? There were some good commentary on that article. So, far it’s only been Uri writing something similar on SOFREP, hell it wasn’t even on SOFREP, he posted his article from ITS.
Mark Kelly (Gabby Gifford), Gen. McChrystal, etc. have stated something similar, but no actual actionable ideas that will remain faithful to the 2nd Amend. have been put out.
There’s already been too many for the pro NRA (blaming everything else, but the sheer number of guns in public hands) stance, but not so much the con NRA stance, like yours, Uri’s, etc. can you put out con NRA articles on SOFREP as well to balance things out? Thanks, man.
We need ideas out there (not just from the ‘Obamy’s gonna take my guns’ crowd), and SOFREP can totally lead on this.
Scubadive
LCpl, the solution is families & personal responsibility. The lead as you put isn’t gonna come from SOFREP, government, police or the such…..it comes from teaching our children & those we have influence with that life is valuable & means something. We have a generation being told they are entitled & not that they have to work for what they want & get. We have a ME generation….if we want real change…that ha to change!
Scubadive
LCpl, the solution is families & personal responsibility. The lead as you put isn’t gonna come from SOFREP, government, police or the such…..it comes from teaching our children & those we have influence with that life is valuable & means something. We have a generation being told they are entitled & not that they have to work for what they want & get. We have a ME generation….if we want real change…that ha to change!
Scubadive
LCpl, the solution is families & personal responsibility. The lead as you put isn’t gonna come from SOFREP, government, police or the such…..it comes from teaching our children & those we have influence with that life is valuable & means something. We have a generation being told they are entitled & not that they have to work for what they want & get. We have a ME generation….if we want real change…that ha to change!
Scubadive
LCpl, the solution is families & personal responsibility. The lead as you put isn’t gonna come from SOFREP, government, police or the such…..it comes from teaching our children & those we have influence with that life is valuable & means something. We have a generation being told they are entitled & not that they have to work for what they want & get. We have a ME generation….if we want real change…that ha to change!
WndlB
Well, somebody should weigh in from ‘the other side.’ My shooting experience has been on the gun range in high school ROTC in the 1960’s and some skeet shooting since. I own no guns. On the other hand, I’ve been seriously mugged three times, and, if the perps had had guns, I wouldn’t be around to type this. From that, I’ve been of the view that the fewer guns in society, the better: the US would be better with Britain’s or Japan’s (or nearly any other country’s) gun homocide rate. Correspondingly, I was against concealed carry–until the NRA member on my staff asked if I really thought that the passage of the law (or its failure) would make any difference in what he did.
Would we be a better country without some substantial part of the extant 270,000,000 guns? I think so: at schools and with deranged people, I’d rather have the Chinese mass knifing than the Newtown mass shooting.There’d be fewer homocides, fewer accidents, fewer tots shooting tots, fewer dead bodies from episodes of drunken anger. Is that going to happen? NO. That train has already left the station; those societal (and consumer) decisons have already been made, the other way.
We don’t yet know whether or how the mother in the Newtown had (or hadn’t) secured her firearms. With Giffords and Aurora, though, it would seem like there could have been some ways to make it more difficult for the notably unstable shooters to get their hands on their arsenals.
As for the gun fanciers here, worry not a single hair about confiscation. Just as with the buiding of the Death Star, there isn’t enough money!! OTOH, do expect a substantially more robust, substantially less self-constrained background check system than at present.
What, BTW, does the military do to screen out and get rid of nutcases before they are armed-up? Are there lessons to be learned/applied in the civilian context?
WndlB
Well, somebody should weigh in from ‘the other side.’ My shooting experience has been on the gun range in high school ROTC in the 1960’s and some skeet shooting since. I own no guns. On the other hand, I’ve been seriously mugged three times, and, if the perps had had guns, I wouldn’t be around to type this. From that, I’ve been of the view that the fewer guns in society, the better: the US would be better with Britain’s or Japan’s (or nearly any other country’s) gun homocide rate. Correspondingly, I was against concealed carry–until the NRA member on my staff asked if I really thought that the passage of the law (or its failure) would make any difference in what he did.
Would we be a better country without some substantial part of the extant 270,000,000 guns? I think so: at schools and with deranged people, I’d rather have the Chinese mass knifing than the Newtown mass shooting.There’d be fewer homocides, fewer accidents, fewer tots shooting tots, fewer dead bodies from episodes of drunken anger. Is that going to happen? NO. That train has already left the station; those societal (and consumer) decisons have already been made, the other way.
We don’t yet know whether or how the mother in the Newtown had (or hadn’t) secured her firearms. With Giffords and Aurora, though, it would seem like there could have been some ways to make it more difficult for the notably unstable shooters to get their hands on their arsenals.
As for the gun fanciers here, worry not a single hair about confiscation. Just as with the buiding of the Death Star, there isn’t enough money!! OTOH, do expect a substantially more robust, substantially less self-constrained background check system than at present.
What, BTW, does the military do to screen out and get rid of nutcases before they are armed-up? Are there lessons to be learned/applied in the civilian context?
WndlB
Well, somebody should weigh in from ‘the other side.’ My shooting experience has been on the gun range in high school ROTC in the 1960’s and some skeet shooting since. I own no guns. On the other hand, I’ve been seriously mugged three times, and, if the perps had had guns, I wouldn’t be around to type this. From that, I’ve been of the view that the fewer guns in society, the better: the US would be better with Britain’s or Japan’s (or nearly any other country’s) gun homocide rate. Correspondingly, I was against concealed carry–until the NRA member on my staff asked if I really thought that the passage of the law (or its failure) would make any difference in what he did.
Would we be a better country without some substantial part of the extant 270,000,000 guns? I think so: at schools and with deranged people, I’d rather have the Chinese mass knifing than the Newtown mass shooting.There’d be fewer homocides, fewer accidents, fewer tots shooting tots, fewer dead bodies from episodes of drunken anger. Is that going to happen? NO. That train has already left the station; those societal (and consumer) decisons have already been made, the other way.
We don’t yet know whether or how the mother in the Newtown had (or hadn’t) secured her firearms. With Giffords and Aurora, though, it would seem like there could have been some ways to make it more difficult for the notably unstable shooters to get their hands on their arsenals.
As for the gun fanciers here, worry not a single hair about confiscation. Just as with the buiding of the Death Star, there isn’t enough money!! OTOH, do expect a substantially more robust, substantially less self-constrained background check system than at present.
What, BTW, does the military do to screen out and get rid of nutcases before they are armed-up? Are there lessons to be learned/applied in the civilian context?
WndlB
Well, somebody should weigh in from ‘the other side.’ My shooting experience has been on the gun range in high school ROTC in the 1960’s and some skeet shooting since. I own no guns. On the other hand, I’ve been seriously mugged three times, and, if the perps had had guns, I wouldn’t be around to type this. From that, I’ve been of the view that the fewer guns in society, the better: the US would be better with Britain’s or Japan’s (or nearly any other country’s) gun homocide rate. Correspondingly, I was against concealed carry–until the NRA member on my staff asked if I really thought that the passage of the law (or its failure) would make any difference in what he did.
Would we be a better country without some substantial part of the extant 270,000,000 guns? I think so: at schools and with deranged people, I’d rather have the Chinese mass knifing than the Newtown mass shooting.There’d be fewer homocides, fewer accidents, fewer tots shooting tots, fewer dead bodies from episodes of drunken anger. Is that going to happen? NO. That train has already left the station; those societal (and consumer) decisons have already been made, the other way.
We don’t yet know whether or how the mother in the Newtown had (or hadn’t) secured her firearms. With Giffords and Aurora, though, it would seem like there could have been some ways to make it more difficult for the notably unstable shooters to get their hands on their arsenals.
As for the gun fanciers here, worry not a single hair about confiscation. Just as with the buiding of the Death Star, there isn’t enough money!! OTOH, do expect a substantially more robust, substantially less self-constrained background check system than at present.
What, BTW, does the military do to screen out and get rid of nutcases before they are armed-up? Are there lessons to be learned/applied in the civilian context?
johnofsmith
Congratulations, Brandon! Your idiotic post just made CNN, and helped gun-control advocates across the country. You just left your fellow Americans with six-shot revolvers to protect themselves, their families and their homes. Thanks for helping with terrorists abroad just to advocate the rest of us to be defenseless to the thugs at home.
johnofsmith
Congratulations, Brandon! Your idiotic post just made CNN, and helped gun-control advocates across the country. You just left your fellow Americans with six-shot revolvers to protect themselves, their families and their homes. Thanks for helping with terrorists abroad just to advocate the rest of us to be defenseless to the thugs at home.
johnofsmith
Congratulations, Brandon! Your idiotic post just made CNN, and helped gun-control advocates across the country. You just left your fellow Americans with six-shot revolvers to protect themselves, their families and their homes. Thanks for helping with terrorists abroad just to advocate the rest of us to be defenseless to the thugs at home.
johnofsmith
Congratulations, Brandon! Your idiotic post just made CNN, and helped gun-control advocates across the country. You just left your fellow Americans with six-shot revolvers to protect themselves, their families and their homes. Thanks for helping with terrorists abroad just to advocate the rest of us to be defenseless to the thugs at home.
Scubadive
WndIB,
You are surly entitled to your opinion, but you should do a bit of research before you make broad statements. Lets take the UK for example: it’s true that there were only 59 murders by gun; however, violent crime in the UK is out of control. Per 100,000 ppl it’s over 2,030 incidents as compared to the US which has only 466 per 100,000 ppl. You have to also take into account the size of the US cities in comparison & if you do than it’s actually less given how much larger our cities are than the ones in the UK. Now lets take your attitude of how safe we would be without guns…the second amendment isn’t about or for hunting….it’s about protecting the freedom we all enjoy. You see the founders understood how intoxicating power can be & wanted to make sure that we would never be in a position like what we came out of. Now if you really believe that our country can’t be destroyed or that a dictator can’t take power or that your freedom can’t be loss…well, you don’t pay attention to history. We have the right to protect ourselves, you have the right to not buy a gun, you don’t have the right to tell me I can’t. You cannot legislate morality. Evil is Evil. The worst school mass killing was in the 1920’s with a man setting 3 bombs in a school. Explane to me why the areas with the lowest crime rates are also the most armed? Why do cops have guns?? Not to protect you..it’s to protect themselves. Why shouldn’t I have that same ability? You see Crazy people are going to do crazy things & as a responsible citizen I’m a first responder to an emergency situation. Therefore if I’m legally carrying my weapon & a shooting occurs…than its my job to respond in an appropriate way to save lives. Not hide & wait 8 minutes for a cop to get there. Do you have any idea how much damage someone can do with a bat in 8 min? Or a knife? Or a pipe? Or a gun? A lot. I assure you if I’m ever in that situation I will act & I will kill the threat!
Scubadive
WndIB,
You are surly entitled to your opinion, but you should do a bit of research before you make broad statements. Lets take the UK for example: it’s true that there were only 59 murders by gun; however, violent crime in the UK is out of control. Per 100,000 ppl it’s over 2,030 incidents as compared to the US which has only 466 per 100,000 ppl. You have to also take into account the size of the US cities in comparison & if you do than it’s actually less given how much larger our cities are than the ones in the UK. Now lets take your attitude of how safe we would be without guns…the second amendment isn’t about or for hunting….it’s about protecting the freedom we all enjoy. You see the founders understood how intoxicating power can be & wanted to make sure that we would never be in a position like what we came out of. Now if you really believe that our country can’t be destroyed or that a dictator can’t take power or that your freedom can’t be loss…well, you don’t pay attention to history. We have the right to protect ourselves, you have the right to not buy a gun, you don’t have the right to tell me I can’t. You cannot legislate morality. Evil is Evil. The worst school mass killing was in the 1920’s with a man setting 3 bombs in a school. Explane to me why the areas with the lowest crime rates are also the most armed? Why do cops have guns?? Not to protect you..it’s to protect themselves. Why shouldn’t I have that same ability? You see Crazy people are going to do crazy things & as a responsible citizen I’m a first responder to an emergency situation. Therefore if I’m legally carrying my weapon & a shooting occurs…than its my job to respond in an appropriate way to save lives. Not hide & wait 8 minutes for a cop to get there. Do you have any idea how much damage someone can do with a bat in 8 min? Or a knife? Or a pipe? Or a gun? A lot. I assure you if I’m ever in that situation I will act & I will kill the threat!
Scubadive
WndIB,
You are surly entitled to your opinion, but you should do a bit of research before you make broad statements. Lets take the UK for example: it’s true that there were only 59 murders by gun; however, violent crime in the UK is out of control. Per 100,000 ppl it’s over 2,030 incidents as compared to the US which has only 466 per 100,000 ppl. You have to also take into account the size of the US cities in comparison & if you do than it’s actually less given how much larger our cities are than the ones in the UK. Now lets take your attitude of how safe we would be without guns…the second amendment isn’t about or for hunting….it’s about protecting the freedom we all enjoy. You see the founders understood how intoxicating power can be & wanted to make sure that we would never be in a position like what we came out of. Now if you really believe that our country can’t be destroyed or that a dictator can’t take power or that your freedom can’t be loss…well, you don’t pay attention to history. We have the right to protect ourselves, you have the right to not buy a gun, you don’t have the right to tell me I can’t. You cannot legislate morality. Evil is Evil. The worst school mass killing was in the 1920’s with a man setting 3 bombs in a school. Explane to me why the areas with the lowest crime rates are also the most armed? Why do cops have guns?? Not to protect you..it’s to protect themselves. Why shouldn’t I have that same ability? You see Crazy people are going to do crazy things & as a responsible citizen I’m a first responder to an emergency situation. Therefore if I’m legally carrying my weapon & a shooting occurs…than its my job to respond in an appropriate way to save lives. Not hide & wait 8 minutes for a cop to get there. Do you have any idea how much damage someone can do with a bat in 8 min? Or a knife? Or a pipe? Or a gun? A lot. I assure you if I’m ever in that situation I will act & I will kill the threat!
Scubadive
WndIB,
You are surly entitled to your opinion, but you should do a bit of research before you make broad statements. Lets take the UK for example: it’s true that there were only 59 murders by gun; however, violent crime in the UK is out of control. Per 100,000 ppl it’s over 2,030 incidents as compared to the US which has only 466 per 100,000 ppl. You have to also take into account the size of the US cities in comparison & if you do than it’s actually less given how much larger our cities are than the ones in the UK. Now lets take your attitude of how safe we would be without guns…the second amendment isn’t about or for hunting….it’s about protecting the freedom we all enjoy. You see the founders understood how intoxicating power can be & wanted to make sure that we would never be in a position like what we came out of. Now if you really believe that our country can’t be destroyed or that a dictator can’t take power or that your freedom can’t be loss…well, you don’t pay attention to history. We have the right to protect ourselves, you have the right to not buy a gun, you don’t have the right to tell me I can’t. You cannot legislate morality. Evil is Evil. The worst school mass killing was in the 1920’s with a man setting 3 bombs in a school. Explane to me why the areas with the lowest crime rates are also the most armed? Why do cops have guns?? Not to protect you..it’s to protect themselves. Why shouldn’t I have that same ability? You see Crazy people are going to do crazy things & as a responsible citizen I’m a first responder to an emergency situation. Therefore if I’m legally carrying my weapon & a shooting occurs…than its my job to respond in an appropriate way to save lives. Not hide & wait 8 minutes for a cop to get there. Do you have any idea how much damage someone can do with a bat in 8 min? Or a knife? Or a pipe? Or a gun? A lot. I assure you if I’m ever in that situation I will act & I will kill the threat!
Scubadive
Mr. Webb I have profound respect for you & for your service. Thank you.
That said, I feel like your information on this subject isn’t really accurate. You say we have a mass shooting problem we can no longer ignore. Not true. The murder rate in this nation is down, so called mass killings are down, & violent crime is down. We don’t have a mass shooting problem in this country. We have a HEART problem in this country. Lets not avoid the real issue chasing a symptom.
Scubadive
Mr. Webb I have profound respect for you & for your service. Thank you.
That said, I feel like your information on this subject isn’t really accurate. You say we have a mass shooting problem we can no longer ignore. Not true. The murder rate in this nation is down, so called mass killings are down, & violent crime is down. We don’t have a mass shooting problem in this country. We have a HEART problem in this country. Lets not avoid the real issue chasing a symptom.
Scubadive
Mr. Webb I have profound respect for you & for your service. Thank you.
That said, I feel like your information on this subject isn’t really accurate. You say we have a mass shooting problem we can no longer ignore. Not true. The murder rate in this nation is down, so called mass killings are down, & violent crime is down. We don’t have a mass shooting problem in this country. We have a HEART problem in this country. Lets not avoid the real issue chasing a symptom.
Scubadive
Mr. Webb I have profound respect for you & for your service. Thank you.
That said, I feel like your information on this subject isn’t really accurate. You say we have a mass shooting problem we can no longer ignore. Not true. The murder rate in this nation is down, so called mass killings are down, & violent crime is down. We don’t have a mass shooting problem in this country. We have a HEART problem in this country. Lets not avoid the real issue chasing a symptom.
Scubadive
Very interesting facts about homicide rates in the UK:
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
Scubadive
Very interesting facts about homicide rates in the UK:
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
Scubadive
Very interesting facts about homicide rates in the UK:
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
Scubadive
Very interesting facts about homicide rates in the UK:
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
What Piers Morgan Does Not Tell You About UK Homicides
Yossi Gestetner
If you watched any of the recent segments by Piers Morgan on guns, you certainly came across how he proudly waves the stat that only fifty or so people are killed annually in England by guns vs. the 11,000-plus that are killed in the United States. Mr. Morgan points to Britain’s tough gun laws of 1997 as the reason why the numbers are low.
But there are three major problems with his proud number:
1) If you look at page 32 of this recent UK Home Office report you will see that total Homicides in the U.K. in the years and decades before 1997, were lower than in the States. In other words, it’s not as if 2,000 people were gunned down annually in England before the ban and now the numbers came crashing down to fifty a year. Their total homicide rate, by gun or knife, was for decades a fraction compared to the United States.
2) In all but one year since 1997, more people have been murdered in the UK than in 1997 (look at page 31 of the above-linked report). So total homicides did not come down despite the Gun Ban. If you want to argue that total murders are up only due to population growth while the rate per 100K is down, wrong again. The numbers are stuck for more than two decades give or take a fraction, while in the United States the rate did drop substantially since 1997 despite people buying “high capacity” magazine guns or whatever it is that the Left hates.
3) Finally, this is a point that everyone makes yet Mr. Morgan decides to ignore: Violent Crimes in the UK is the worst in Europe and is worse than in many third world countries. These sickening numbers started to shape up post 1997. Similiar numbers happened in Australia since their 1996 gun restrictions.
For one Tweet: UK homicides were way lower than US even before 1997; Homicides there are up since ’97 and violent crimes rocketed since then.
Note: When people speak of “crime in the UK,” it usually refers to England and Wales combined
ms1
Hi,
i think the gun debate has exactly two arguments:
a) Limiting my right to guns limits my freedom.
b) By owning weapons, other limit my freedom.
The rest is pretty much BS and smokescreen (on both sides).
I am for gun control. But i don’t think you can jinx all guns away. An alternative is, that everyone owning a gun (unless it is stored outside his control at a safe location) has to purchase an insurance for it. This has to cover all damage to third parties by this gun.
This would have two effects:
# People would do more of a risk/benefit calculation since the risk now also incurs costs.
# People suffering from gun violence stand a chance of not getting financial insult on top of physical injury.
If a gun gets stolen, the owner has to pay the insurance fees for the remaining year, the covering for damages extends to ten years past that (and insurance companies have to factor that risk).
Yours, Martin
ms1
Hi,
i think the gun debate has exactly two arguments:
a) Limiting my right to guns limits my freedom.
b) By owning weapons, other limit my freedom.
The rest is pretty much BS and smokescreen (on both sides).
I am for gun control. But i don’t think you can jinx all guns away. An alternative is, that everyone owning a gun (unless it is stored outside his control at a safe location) has to purchase an insurance for it. This has to cover all damage to third parties by this gun.
This would have two effects:
# People would do more of a risk/benefit calculation since the risk now also incurs costs.
# People suffering from gun violence stand a chance of not getting financial insult on top of physical injury.
If a gun gets stolen, the owner has to pay the insurance fees for the remaining year, the covering for damages extends to ten years past that (and insurance companies have to factor that risk).
Yours, Martin
ms1
Hi,
i think the gun debate has exactly two arguments:
a) Limiting my right to guns limits my freedom.
b) By owning weapons, other limit my freedom.
The rest is pretty much BS and smokescreen (on both sides).
I am for gun control. But i don’t think you can jinx all guns away. An alternative is, that everyone owning a gun (unless it is stored outside his control at a safe location) has to purchase an insurance for it. This has to cover all damage to third parties by this gun.
This would have two effects:
# People would do more of a risk/benefit calculation since the risk now also incurs costs.
# People suffering from gun violence stand a chance of not getting financial insult on top of physical injury.
If a gun gets stolen, the owner has to pay the insurance fees for the remaining year, the covering for damages extends to ten years past that (and insurance companies have to factor that risk).
Yours, Martin
ms1
Hi,
i think the gun debate has exactly two arguments:
a) Limiting my right to guns limits my freedom.
b) By owning weapons, other limit my freedom.
The rest is pretty much BS and smokescreen (on both sides).
I am for gun control. But i don’t think you can jinx all guns away. An alternative is, that everyone owning a gun (unless it is stored outside his control at a safe location) has to purchase an insurance for it. This has to cover all damage to third parties by this gun.
This would have two effects:
# People would do more of a risk/benefit calculation since the risk now also incurs costs.
# People suffering from gun violence stand a chance of not getting financial insult on top of physical injury.
If a gun gets stolen, the owner has to pay the insurance fees for the remaining year, the covering for damages extends to ten years past that (and insurance companies have to factor that risk).
Yours, Martin
WndlB
Scubadive,
Impressive research and argumentation that misses the central point: guns ARE more lethal than bayonets, or clubs or fists, all of which, of course, can be lethal too. It’s just that they are unlikely to be as lethal as quickly–which is why armies and police forces–and bad guys–worldwide equip themselves with, wait for it, guns. Right?
If I take a swing at you, the only thing you’ll die of is laughter. If I take a shot at you…
I’m not at all sure that the statistics support your statement that the areas with the lowest crime rates are the most armed: e.g. the Scandanavian countries. And I’m certainly not supporting denying you your right to defend yourself: you appear to be trained and knowledgeable. Lanza, Holmes and Laughner–along with the hundreds of killers in Chicago–maybe they should have a little less opportunity to “defend themselves.”
WndlB
Scubadive,
Impressive research and argumentation that misses the central point: guns ARE more lethal than bayonets, or clubs or fists, all of which, of course, can be lethal too. It’s just that they are unlikely to be as lethal as quickly–which is why armies and police forces–and bad guys–worldwide equip themselves with, wait for it, guns. Right?
If I take a swing at you, the only thing you’ll die of is laughter. If I take a shot at you…
I’m not at all sure that the statistics support your statement that the areas with the lowest crime rates are the most armed: e.g. the Scandanavian countries. And I’m certainly not supporting denying you your right to defend yourself: you appear to be trained and knowledgeable. Lanza, Holmes and Laughner–along with the hundreds of killers in Chicago–maybe they should have a little less opportunity to “defend themselves.”
WndlB
Scubadive,
Impressive research and argumentation that misses the central point: guns ARE more lethal than bayonets, or clubs or fists, all of which, of course, can be lethal too. It’s just that they are unlikely to be as lethal as quickly–which is why armies and police forces–and bad guys–worldwide equip themselves with, wait for it, guns. Right?
If I take a swing at you, the only thing you’ll die of is laughter. If I take a shot at you…
I’m not at all sure that the statistics support your statement that the areas with the lowest crime rates are the most armed: e.g. the Scandanavian countries. And I’m certainly not supporting denying you your right to defend yourself: you appear to be trained and knowledgeable. Lanza, Holmes and Laughner–along with the hundreds of killers in Chicago–maybe they should have a little less opportunity to “defend themselves.”
WndlB
Scubadive,
Impressive research and argumentation that misses the central point: guns ARE more lethal than bayonets, or clubs or fists, all of which, of course, can be lethal too. It’s just that they are unlikely to be as lethal as quickly–which is why armies and police forces–and bad guys–worldwide equip themselves with, wait for it, guns. Right?
If I take a swing at you, the only thing you’ll die of is laughter. If I take a shot at you…
I’m not at all sure that the statistics support your statement that the areas with the lowest crime rates are the most armed: e.g. the Scandanavian countries. And I’m certainly not supporting denying you your right to defend yourself: you appear to be trained and knowledgeable. Lanza, Holmes and Laughner–along with the hundreds of killers in Chicago–maybe they should have a little less opportunity to “defend themselves.”
Scubadive
WndIB,
So the bad guys having gun & me not having them isn’t a viable option. If you or anyone else can guarantee that no bad guys will have guns than I will be happy to not have one. Since Mexico has the toughest gun laws in NorthAmerica yet the gun violence is through the roof. How about DC & Chicago having some of the toughest gun laws in the US & the gun murder rates are out of control. I’m just wondering when the gun became the issue & the issue stopped being about the person. When did the heart of America not matter anymore. If we want less violence than we need to deal with the real issue. We have had guns for a long time & violence became more of an issue when media began dismissing the importance of life & the value of an individual. Lets deal with educating our kids on the value of life. I find it fascinating that more people die from car related accidents & yet no one is calling for the removal of cars from the marketplace, or alcohol which causes an alarming amount of deaths among the youth of this nation. We have made drugs illegal & yet abuse and addiction run ramped. We allow as a nation 3,287 babies a day to be killed because they are unwanted & yet I don’t see a damn one if you crying out in hiorror. Your all hypocrites. You don’t care about human life if your for gun control..you are for slavery & human control. Don’t ask me to pay for an abortion & they tell me it’s non of my business. I’m sick of all the BS arguments.
If there is a requirement for a certain amount of hours of training need to happen for the purchase of certain weapons; than I’m fine with that. We have to take a test to drive, to fly, to scuba dive, to graduate school..I’m cool with putting educational measures in place to make sure people are responsible. But lets be real…that’s not an option because the real agenda is to disarm America. Well, COME AND GET IT!!
Scubadive
WndIB,
So the bad guys having gun & me not having them isn’t a viable option. If you or anyone else can guarantee that no bad guys will have guns than I will be happy to not have one. Since Mexico has the toughest gun laws in NorthAmerica yet the gun violence is through the roof. How about DC & Chicago having some of the toughest gun laws in the US & the gun murder rates are out of control. I’m just wondering when the gun became the issue & the issue stopped being about the person. When did the heart of America not matter anymore. If we want less violence than we need to deal with the real issue. We have had guns for a long time & violence became more of an issue when media began dismissing the importance of life & the value of an individual. Lets deal with educating our kids on the value of life. I find it fascinating that more people die from car related accidents & yet no one is calling for the removal of cars from the marketplace, or alcohol which causes an alarming amount of deaths among the youth of this nation. We have made drugs illegal & yet abuse and addiction run ramped. We allow as a nation 3,287 babies a day to be killed because they are unwanted & yet I don’t see a damn one if you crying out in hiorror. Your all hypocrites. You don’t care about human life if your for gun control..you are for slavery & human control. Don’t ask me to pay for an abortion & they tell me it’s non of my business. I’m sick of all the BS arguments.
If there is a requirement for a certain amount of hours of training need to happen for the purchase of certain weapons; than I’m fine with that. We have to take a test to drive, to fly, to scuba dive, to graduate school..I’m cool with putting educational measures in place to make sure people are responsible. But lets be real…that’s not an option because the real agenda is to disarm America. Well, COME AND GET IT!!
Scubadive
WndIB,
So the bad guys having gun & me not having them isn’t a viable option. If you or anyone else can guarantee that no bad guys will have guns than I will be happy to not have one. Since Mexico has the toughest gun laws in NorthAmerica yet the gun violence is through the roof. How about DC & Chicago having some of the toughest gun laws in the US & the gun murder rates are out of control. I’m just wondering when the gun became the issue & the issue stopped being about the person. When did the heart of America not matter anymore. If we want less violence than we need to deal with the real issue. We have had guns for a long time & violence became more of an issue when media began dismissing the importance of life & the value of an individual. Lets deal with educating our kids on the value of life. I find it fascinating that more people die from car related accidents & yet no one is calling for the removal of cars from the marketplace, or alcohol which causes an alarming amount of deaths among the youth of this nation. We have made drugs illegal & yet abuse and addiction run ramped. We allow as a nation 3,287 babies a day to be killed because they are unwanted & yet I don’t see a damn one if you crying out in hiorror. Your all hypocrites. You don’t care about human life if your for gun control..you are for slavery & human control. Don’t ask me to pay for an abortion & they tell me it’s non of my business. I’m sick of all the BS arguments.
If there is a requirement for a certain amount of hours of training need to happen for the purchase of certain weapons; than I’m fine with that. We have to take a test to drive, to fly, to scuba dive, to graduate school..I’m cool with putting educational measures in place to make sure people are responsible. But lets be real…that’s not an option because the real agenda is to disarm America. Well, COME AND GET IT!!
Scubadive
WndIB,
So the bad guys having gun & me not having them isn’t a viable option. If you or anyone else can guarantee that no bad guys will have guns than I will be happy to not have one. Since Mexico has the toughest gun laws in NorthAmerica yet the gun violence is through the roof. How about DC & Chicago having some of the toughest gun laws in the US & the gun murder rates are out of control. I’m just wondering when the gun became the issue & the issue stopped being about the person. When did the heart of America not matter anymore. If we want less violence than we need to deal with the real issue. We have had guns for a long time & violence became more of an issue when media began dismissing the importance of life & the value of an individual. Lets deal with educating our kids on the value of life. I find it fascinating that more people die from car related accidents & yet no one is calling for the removal of cars from the marketplace, or alcohol which causes an alarming amount of deaths among the youth of this nation. We have made drugs illegal & yet abuse and addiction run ramped. We allow as a nation 3,287 babies a day to be killed because they are unwanted & yet I don’t see a damn one if you crying out in hiorror. Your all hypocrites. You don’t care about human life if your for gun control..you are for slavery & human control. Don’t ask me to pay for an abortion & they tell me it’s non of my business. I’m sick of all the BS arguments.
If there is a requirement for a certain amount of hours of training need to happen for the purchase of certain weapons; than I’m fine with that. We have to take a test to drive, to fly, to scuba dive, to graduate school..I’m cool with putting educational measures in place to make sure people are responsible. But lets be real…that’s not an option because the real agenda is to disarm America. Well, COME AND GET IT!!
WndlB
Scubadive,
I’m agreeing with your first sentence! No reason to take it to 11!
And the US society is now significantly less crime-ridden than it was in the 1970’s. I think gun-related crime is down too (but may not be right about that). As for the cause–and not saying I’m buying it yet–did you see http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline (and http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/01/lead-and-crime-response-jim-manzi)?
OTOH, I drove past a flag flying at full-staff today, and my first thought was–oh, good, no school shootings. It was a long time from Charles Whitman to the next one. Now, they do seem to be coming with greater frequency.
(Getting older myself, I’ve recently wondered if that might not be a way to go–until I read Brandon Webb’s women’s self-defense pieces (which is, in effect, what I am in terms of strength, training etc.) and realized that without scenario-based, high-stress training, guns weren’t the way to go for me.)
Like your idea of licensing. Too many people seem, now, to be getting guns solely on the basis of some sort of fantasy of self-defense and/or confiscation–and with no training at all.
WndlB
Scubadive,
I’m agreeing with your first sentence! No reason to take it to 11!
And the US society is now significantly less crime-ridden than it was in the 1970’s. I think gun-related crime is down too (but may not be right about that). As for the cause–and not saying I’m buying it yet–did you see http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline (and http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/01/lead-and-crime-response-jim-manzi)?
OTOH, I drove past a flag flying at full-staff today, and my first thought was–oh, good, no school shootings. It was a long time from Charles Whitman to the next one. Now, they do seem to be coming with greater frequency.
(Getting older myself, I’ve recently wondered if that might not be a way to go–until I read Brandon Webb’s women’s self-defense pieces (which is, in effect, what I am in terms of strength, training etc.) and realized that without scenario-based, high-stress training, guns weren’t the way to go for me.)
Like your idea of licensing. Too many people seem, now, to be getting guns solely on the basis of some sort of fantasy of self-defense and/or confiscation–and with no training at all.
WndlB
Scubadive,
I’m agreeing with your first sentence! No reason to take it to 11!
And the US society is now significantly less crime-ridden than it was in the 1970’s. I think gun-related crime is down too (but may not be right about that). As for the cause–and not saying I’m buying it yet–did you see http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline (and http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/01/lead-and-crime-response-jim-manzi)?
OTOH, I drove past a flag flying at full-staff today, and my first thought was–oh, good, no school shootings. It was a long time from Charles Whitman to the next one. Now, they do seem to be coming with greater frequency.
(Getting older myself, I’ve recently wondered if that might not be a way to go–until I read Brandon Webb’s women’s self-defense pieces (which is, in effect, what I am in terms of strength, training etc.) and realized that without scenario-based, high-stress training, guns weren’t the way to go for me.)
Like your idea of licensing. Too many people seem, now, to be getting guns solely on the basis of some sort of fantasy of self-defense and/or confiscation–and with no training at all.
WndlB
Scubadive,
I’m agreeing with your first sentence! No reason to take it to 11!
And the US society is now significantly less crime-ridden than it was in the 1970’s. I think gun-related crime is down too (but may not be right about that). As for the cause–and not saying I’m buying it yet–did you see http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline (and http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/01/lead-and-crime-response-jim-manzi)?
OTOH, I drove past a flag flying at full-staff today, and my first thought was–oh, good, no school shootings. It was a long time from Charles Whitman to the next one. Now, they do seem to be coming with greater frequency.
(Getting older myself, I’ve recently wondered if that might not be a way to go–until I read Brandon Webb’s women’s self-defense pieces (which is, in effect, what I am in terms of strength, training etc.) and realized that without scenario-based, high-stress training, guns weren’t the way to go for me.)
Like your idea of licensing. Too many people seem, now, to be getting guns solely on the basis of some sort of fantasy of self-defense and/or confiscation–and with no training at all.
ChupaCabra
@Scubadive
People forget that developmental stages in children have permanant affects. An adult can watch/play violent movies, images, games, whatever and distinguish between reality and make believe. Kids with growing brains can’t watch the kind of violence, incongruent social behavior and disrespect that is common place on prime time, in the theatres on their computers, in their homes without these results. Also, people understand the law means nothing, our leadership is corrupt no matter which party, which crimes are committed. The guy who is the fastet draw owns the conflict. I have maintained my 2A rights with and without a CCW. In 2002 it got too expensive and too much hassle to keep reapplying so after 20 years of doing my CCW duty, I just put my money where my mouth is, vote for and support the constitution and if I need to shoot someone, I’ll take my chances. I’m too old to give a shit about politics – its all a lie. Republicans or Democrats will or will not gun control whichever way keeps their feet in the feed trough. I just try to slow my heart rate, keep breathing, stay sharp and keep the eyes in the back of my head open. I hope I stay as lucky as I have been for all these years and shoot them before they shoot me.
ChupaCabra
@Scubadive
People forget that developmental stages in children have permanant affects. An adult can watch/play violent movies, images, games, whatever and distinguish between reality and make believe. Kids with growing brains can’t watch the kind of violence, incongruent social behavior and disrespect that is common place on prime time, in the theatres on their computers, in their homes without these results. Also, people understand the law means nothing, our leadership is corrupt no matter which party, which crimes are committed. The guy who is the fastet draw owns the conflict. I have maintained my 2A rights with and without a CCW. In 2002 it got too expensive and too much hassle to keep reapplying so after 20 years of doing my CCW duty, I just put my money where my mouth is, vote for and support the constitution and if I need to shoot someone, I’ll take my chances. I’m too old to give a shit about politics – its all a lie. Republicans or Democrats will or will not gun control whichever way keeps their feet in the feed trough. I just try to slow my heart rate, keep breathing, stay sharp and keep the eyes in the back of my head open. I hope I stay as lucky as I have been for all these years and shoot them before they shoot me.
pat I
Please excuse my posting here since I am not a veteran and have not (regretfully) served in our military.
I have a ten year old boy. He’s been swimming competitively since the age of five. From the beginning I was impressed by the firm and no nonsense approach of his coaches. No whining, hard work and dedication. Thankfully, this is one of the few sports left where the “A” for effort and participation trophy mentality so popular with modern parents is blessedly absent.
The team has two mottos-one borrowed from, I believe, the Navy SEALS:
Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect.
The easiest day was yesterday.
4-5 days a week i see 8-10 year olds go through of two hours of swimming, finishing up at 9:30 PM. The kids are resilient, well adjusted and well behaved. When they lose a meet, the next practice is is more intense than usual.
I think a large portion of our problems regarding gun violence is that parents applaud every little thing their kids do. there’s no accountability, discipline and raised from birth to believe that they’re special. Doing so makes them ill equipped when they step intocollege or the work place and are shocked that the world actually expects them to accomplish something. They never defended themselves against a bully.
So when a lack of tough love causes them to crack at the slightest hint of pressure they don’t have the skills or life experience to deal with their emotions – so they reach for a gun.
I got an earful not too long ago by a PTA mother who was spearheading an anti-bullying campaign at my son’s school (the school really doesn’t have a bullying problem but hey..). She saw my growing frustration and asked me, “you seem annoyed. How do you teach your son about bullying”.
My answer? “If kids are strating trouble, walk away. If kids taunt you, walk away. If anyone lays a finger on you, you have my permission to cold cock the S.O.B.”.
Overall I agree with the author. Society and thinking has changed.In my day, you had a disagreement, threw a few punches and it was over. Not anymore.
I am a fervent believer in the right to bear arms but the laws need to be tweaked because it’s easier to change the laws than change the Oprah-esque parenting techniques.
pat I
Please excuse my posting here since I am not a veteran and have not (regretfully) served in our military.
I have a ten year old boy. He’s been swimming competitively since the age of five. From the beginning I was impressed by the firm and no nonsense approach of his coaches. No whining, hard work and dedication. Thankfully, this is one of the few sports left where the “A” for effort and participation trophy mentality so popular with modern parents is blessedly absent.
The team has two mottos-one borrowed from, I believe, the Navy SEALS:
Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect.
The easiest day was yesterday.
4-5 days a week i see 8-10 year olds go through of two hours of swimming, finishing up at 9:30 PM. The kids are resilient, well adjusted and well behaved. When they lose a meet, the next practice is is more intense than usual.
I think a large portion of our problems regarding gun violence is that parents applaud every little thing their kids do. there’s no accountability, discipline and raised from birth to believe that they’re special. Doing so makes them ill equipped when they step intocollege or the work place and are shocked that the world actually expects them to accomplish something. They never defended themselves against a bully.
So when a lack of tough love causes them to crack at the slightest hint of pressure they don’t have the skills or life experience to deal with their emotions – so they reach for a gun.
I got an earful not too long ago by a PTA mother who was spearheading an anti-bullying campaign at my son’s school (the school really doesn’t have a bullying problem but hey..). She saw my growing frustration and asked me, “you seem annoyed. How do you teach your son about bullying”.
My answer? “If kids are strating trouble, walk away. If kids taunt you, walk away. If anyone lays a finger on you, you have my permission to cold cock the S.O.B.”.
Overall I agree with the author. Society and thinking has changed.In my day, you had a disagreement, threw a few punches and it was over. Not anymore.
I am a fervent believer in the right to bear arms but the laws need to be tweaked because it’s easier to change the laws than change the Oprah-esque parenting techniques.
pat I
Please excuse my posting here since I am not a veteran and have not (regretfully) served in our military.
I have a ten year old boy. He’s been swimming competitively since the age of five. From the beginning I was impressed by the firm and no nonsense approach of his coaches. No whining, hard work and dedication. Thankfully, this is one of the few sports left where the “A” for effort and participation trophy mentality so popular with modern parents is blessedly absent.
The team has two mottos-one borrowed from, I believe, the Navy SEALS:
Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect.
The easiest day was yesterday.
4-5 days a week i see 8-10 year olds go through of two hours of swimming, finishing up at 9:30 PM. The kids are resilient, well adjusted and well behaved. When they lose a meet, the next practice is is more intense than usual.
I think a large portion of our problems regarding gun violence is that parents applaud every little thing their kids do. there’s no accountability, discipline and raised from birth to believe that they’re special. Doing so makes them ill equipped when they step intocollege or the work place and are shocked that the world actually expects them to accomplish something. They never defended themselves against a bully.
So when a lack of tough love causes them to crack at the slightest hint of pressure they don’t have the skills or life experience to deal with their emotions – so they reach for a gun.
I got an earful not too long ago by a PTA mother who was spearheading an anti-bullying campaign at my son’s school (the school really doesn’t have a bullying problem but hey..). She saw my growing frustration and asked me, “you seem annoyed. How do you teach your son about bullying”.
My answer? “If kids are strating trouble, walk away. If kids taunt you, walk away. If anyone lays a finger on you, you have my permission to cold cock the S.O.B.”.
Overall I agree with the author. Society and thinking has changed.In my day, you had a disagreement, threw a few punches and it was over. Not anymore.
I am a fervent believer in the right to bear arms but the laws need to be tweaked because it’s easier to change the laws than change the Oprah-esque parenting techniques.
pat I
Please excuse my posting here since I am not a veteran and have not (regretfully) served in our military.
I have a ten year old boy. He’s been swimming competitively since the age of five. From the beginning I was impressed by the firm and no nonsense approach of his coaches. No whining, hard work and dedication. Thankfully, this is one of the few sports left where the “A” for effort and participation trophy mentality so popular with modern parents is blessedly absent.
The team has two mottos-one borrowed from, I believe, the Navy SEALS:
Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect.
The easiest day was yesterday.
4-5 days a week i see 8-10 year olds go through of two hours of swimming, finishing up at 9:30 PM. The kids are resilient, well adjusted and well behaved. When they lose a meet, the next practice is is more intense than usual.
I think a large portion of our problems regarding gun violence is that parents applaud every little thing their kids do. there’s no accountability, discipline and raised from birth to believe that they’re special. Doing so makes them ill equipped when they step intocollege or the work place and are shocked that the world actually expects them to accomplish something. They never defended themselves against a bully.
So when a lack of tough love causes them to crack at the slightest hint of pressure they don’t have the skills or life experience to deal with their emotions – so they reach for a gun.
I got an earful not too long ago by a PTA mother who was spearheading an anti-bullying campaign at my son’s school (the school really doesn’t have a bullying problem but hey..). She saw my growing frustration and asked me, “you seem annoyed. How do you teach your son about bullying”.
My answer? “If kids are strating trouble, walk away. If kids taunt you, walk away. If anyone lays a finger on you, you have my permission to cold cock the S.O.B.”.
Overall I agree with the author. Society and thinking has changed.In my day, you had a disagreement, threw a few punches and it was over. Not anymore.
I am a fervent believer in the right to bear arms but the laws need to be tweaked because it’s easier to change the laws than change the Oprah-esque parenting techniques.
pat I
In addition. the worst thing popularized by talking heads and liberal teachers is “self-esteem”.
Self-esteem means nothing without accomplishment. Without accomplishment, self esteem breeds entitlement.
pat I
In addition. the worst thing popularized by talking heads and liberal teachers is “self-esteem”.
Self-esteem means nothing without accomplishment. Without accomplishment, self esteem breeds entitlement.
pat I
In addition. the worst thing popularized by talking heads and liberal teachers is “self-esteem”.
Self-esteem means nothing without accomplishment. Without accomplishment, self esteem breeds entitlement.
pat I
In addition. the worst thing popularized by talking heads and liberal teachers is “self-esteem”.
Self-esteem means nothing without accomplishment. Without accomplishment, self esteem breeds entitlement.
RichardJefferies
I’m willing to have a sensible discussion as well. I would even be wiling to capitulate to some of the demands of the gun control lobby if I though that disarmament wasn’t their eventual goal. There was little attention paid to little Mexican children murdered by guns our Justice Department walked across the border. It is the one time when I have to agree with the black militants; why is it only when white children are killed is it suddenly a problem. On the exact same day as Sandy Hook, at the Chenpeng Village Primary School in China, a man murdered 23 children and an elderly women with a knife. In the UK, doctors are asking for a ban on kitchen knives: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm
I belive the problem is more about your second sentance,
“A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.”
When I grew up every adult male in my circle had a gun rack, my dad, my grandfather, my dad’s friend, and never did I feel the compunction to start shooting up the school, and I hated school. I left when I was 17. My High School in 1987 was open campus. Nowadays schools are fortresses. In the late 40s you could buy surplus rifles out of barrels at a department or hardware store, today it requires much more work, so I’m not inclined to believe the gun proliferation is the cause of the increase in shootings, rather I think its a coarsened society were men are emasculated and are now acting out violently.
RichardJefferies
I’m willing to have a sensible discussion as well. I would even be wiling to capitulate to some of the demands of the gun control lobby if I though that disarmament wasn’t their eventual goal. There was little attention paid to little Mexican children murdered by guns our Justice Department walked across the border. It is the one time when I have to agree with the black militants; why is it only when white children are killed is it suddenly a problem. On the exact same day as Sandy Hook, at the Chenpeng Village Primary School in China, a man murdered 23 children and an elderly women with a knife. In the UK, doctors are asking for a ban on kitchen knives: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm
I belive the problem is more about your second sentance,
“A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.”
When I grew up every adult male in my circle had a gun rack, my dad, my grandfather, my dad’s friend, and never did I feel the compunction to start shooting up the school, and I hated school. I left when I was 17. My High School in 1987 was open campus. Nowadays schools are fortresses. In the late 40s you could buy surplus rifles out of barrels at a department or hardware store, today it requires much more work, so I’m not inclined to believe the gun proliferation is the cause of the increase in shootings, rather I think its a coarsened society were men are emasculated and are now acting out violently.
RichardJefferies
I’m willing to have a sensible discussion as well. I would even be wiling to capitulate to some of the demands of the gun control lobby if I though that disarmament wasn’t their eventual goal. There was little attention paid to little Mexican children murdered by guns our Justice Department walked across the border. It is the one time when I have to agree with the black militants; why is it only when white children are killed is it suddenly a problem. On the exact same day as Sandy Hook, at the Chenpeng Village Primary School in China, a man murdered 23 children and an elderly women with a knife. In the UK, doctors are asking for a ban on kitchen knives: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm
I belive the problem is more about your second sentance,
“A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.”
When I grew up every adult male in my circle had a gun rack, my dad, my grandfather, my dad’s friend, and never did I feel the compunction to start shooting up the school, and I hated school. I left when I was 17. My High School in 1987 was open campus. Nowadays schools are fortresses. In the late 40s you could buy surplus rifles out of barrels at a department or hardware store, today it requires much more work, so I’m not inclined to believe the gun proliferation is the cause of the increase in shootings, rather I think its a coarsened society were men are emasculated and are now acting out violently.
RichardJefferies
I’m willing to have a sensible discussion as well. I would even be wiling to capitulate to some of the demands of the gun control lobby if I though that disarmament wasn’t their eventual goal. There was little attention paid to little Mexican children murdered by guns our Justice Department walked across the border. It is the one time when I have to agree with the black militants; why is it only when white children are killed is it suddenly a problem. On the exact same day as Sandy Hook, at the Chenpeng Village Primary School in China, a man murdered 23 children and an elderly women with a knife. In the UK, doctors are asking for a ban on kitchen knives: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm
I belive the problem is more about your second sentance,
“A lot of young men, frustrated with life, overmedicated, armed with the fresh realization that everyone ISN’T a WINNER in life, go get guns and shoot people.”
When I grew up every adult male in my circle had a gun rack, my dad, my grandfather, my dad’s friend, and never did I feel the compunction to start shooting up the school, and I hated school. I left when I was 17. My High School in 1987 was open campus. Nowadays schools are fortresses. In the late 40s you could buy surplus rifles out of barrels at a department or hardware store, today it requires much more work, so I’m not inclined to believe the gun proliferation is the cause of the increase in shootings, rather I think its a coarsened society were men are emasculated and are now acting out violently.
sgtmed
If you want to take away American’s right to keep and bear arms, then you repeal the 2nd Amendment… Otherwise, shut the fuck up! Brandon, you and I, and many other Americans swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. We took an oath. We vowed to lay down our lives in defense of this document. Not a man, or a flag, but a document. Now you are jumping on this bandwagon of “tweaking” the constitution? No! We repeal it, as the law allows, or we DFW it!!!! Honestly Man! Do you and other veterans even think about these things? The Constitution has not changed since you pledged to lay down your life for it. Why the change? Should we “tweak” the 1st Amendment? You can only speak if we agree with what you say? Come on Brother. Let’s get real….
sgtmed
If you want to take away American’s right to keep and bear arms, then you repeal the 2nd Amendment… Otherwise, shut the fuck up! Brandon, you and I, and many other Americans swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. We took an oath. We vowed to lay down our lives in defense of this document. Not a man, or a flag, but a document. Now you are jumping on this bandwagon of “tweaking” the constitution? No! We repeal it, as the law allows, or we DFW it!!!! Honestly Man! Do you and other veterans even think about these things? The Constitution has not changed since you pledged to lay down your life for it. Why the change? Should we “tweak” the 1st Amendment? You can only speak if we agree with what you say? Come on Brother. Let’s get real….
sgtmed
If you want to take away American’s right to keep and bear arms, then you repeal the 2nd Amendment… Otherwise, shut the fuck up! Brandon, you and I, and many other Americans swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. We took an oath. We vowed to lay down our lives in defense of this document. Not a man, or a flag, but a document. Now you are jumping on this bandwagon of “tweaking” the constitution? No! We repeal it, as the law allows, or we DFW it!!!! Honestly Man! Do you and other veterans even think about these things? The Constitution has not changed since you pledged to lay down your life for it. Why the change it now? Did you decide you were wrong? Should we “tweak” the 1st Amendment? You only have freedom to speak as long as you don’t agree with the President? Come on Brother. Let’s get real….
sgtmed
If you want to take away American’s right to keep and bear arms, then you repeal the 2nd Amendment… Otherwise, shut the fuck up! Brandon, you and I, and many other Americans swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. We took an oath. We vowed to lay down our lives in defense of this document. Not a man, or a flag, but a document. Now you are jumping on this bandwagon of “tweaking” the constitution? No! We repeal it, as the law allows, or we DFW it!!!! Honestly Man! Do you and other veterans even think about these things? The Constitution has not changed since you pledged to lay down your life for it. Why the change it now? Did you decide you were wrong? Should we “tweak” the 1st Amendment? You only have freedom to speak as long as you don’t agree with the President? Come on Brother. Let’s get real….
sgtmed
If you want to take away American’s right to keep and bear arms, then you repeal the 2nd Amendment… Otherwise, shut the fuck up! Brandon, you and I, and many other Americans swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. We took an oath. We vowed to lay down our lives in defense of this document. Not a man, or a flag, but a document. Now you are jumping on this bandwagon of “tweaking” the constitution? No! We repeal it, as the law allows, or we DFW it!!!! Honestly Man! Do you and other veterans even think about these things? The Constitution has not changed since you pledged to lay down your life for it. Why the change it now? Did you decide you were wrong? Should we “tweak” the 1st Amendment? You only have freedom to speak as long as you don’t agree with the President? Come on Brother. Let’s get real….
sgtmed
If you want to take away American’s right to keep and bear arms, then you repeal the 2nd Amendment… Otherwise, shut the fuck up! Brandon, you and I, and many other Americans swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. We took an oath. We vowed to lay down our lives in defense of this document. Not a man, or a flag, but a document. Now you are jumping on this bandwagon of “tweaking” the constitution? No! We repeal it, as the law allows, or we DFW it!!!! Honestly Man! Do you and other veterans even think about these things? The Constitution has not changed since you pledged to lay down your life for it. Why the change it now? Did you decide you were wrong? Should we “tweak” the 1st Amendment? You only have freedom to speak as long as you don’t agree with the President? Come on Brother. Let’s get real….
big_hatdance
Along with Red Circle and American Sniper, the other audio books I’ve consumed recently explain why civilians should never compromise on their right to bear arms. Boykin (of Delta fame and Christian controversy) did a really great clip of the first thing thugs in power do… they take away guns.
-Isaac’s Army (WWII Jews in Warsaw)
-Defiance (more WW II Jews…. and the book is better than the movie
-The Jedburg’s – WW II special forces parachuting into France (would love to see a SEAL review of that one)
-Paul Revere’s ride – (not audio) This is the book Gingrich mentioned during the 2012 campaign- and its awesome.
Go back as far as you can study….AT NO TIME IN THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION HAS IT BEEN A BAD IDEA FOR CIVILIANS TO BE WELL ARMED! Brutal dictators and thugs alike prefer unarmed peasants.
big_hatdance
Along with Red Circle and American Sniper, the other audio books I’ve consumed recently explain why civilians should never compromise on their right to bear arms. Boykin (of Delta fame and Christian controversy) did a really great clip of the first thing thugs in power do… they take away guns.
-Isaac’s Army (WWII Jews in Warsaw)
-Defiance (more WW II Jews…. and the book is better than the movie
-The Jedburg’s – WW II special forces parachuting into France (would love to see a SEAL review of that one)
-Paul Revere’s ride – (not audio) This is the book Gingrich mentioned during the 2012 campaign- and its awesome.
Go back as far as you can study….AT NO TIME IN THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION HAS IT BEEN A BAD IDEA FOR CIVILIANS TO BE WELL ARMED! Brutal dictators and thugs alike prefer unarmed peasants.
big_hatdance
Along with Red Circle and American Sniper, the other audio books I’ve consumed recently explain why civilians should never compromise on their right to bear arms. Boykin (of Delta fame and Christian controversy) did a really great clip of the first thing thugs in power do… they take away guns.
-Isaac’s Army (WWII Jews in Warsaw)
-Defiance (more WW II Jews…. and the book is better than the movie
-The Jedburg’s – WW II special forces parachuting into France (would love to see a SEAL review of that one)
-Paul Revere’s ride – (not audio) This is the book Gingrich mentioned during the 2012 campaign- and its awesome.
Go back as far as you can study….AT NO TIME IN THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION HAS IT BEEN A BAD IDEA FOR CIVILIANS TO BE WELL ARMED! Brutal dictators and thugs alike prefer unarmed peasants.
big_hatdance
Along with Red Circle and American Sniper, the other audio books I’ve consumed recently explain why civilians should never compromise on their right to bear arms. Boykin (of Delta fame and Christian controversy) did a really great clip of the first thing thugs in power do… they take away guns.
-Isaac’s Army (WWII Jews in Warsaw)
-Defiance (more WW II Jews…. and the book is better than the movie
-The Jedburg’s – WW II special forces parachuting into France (would love to see a SEAL review of that one)
-Paul Revere’s ride – (not audio) This is the book Gingrich mentioned during the 2012 campaign- and its awesome.
Go back as far as you can study….AT NO TIME IN THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION HAS IT BEEN A BAD IDEA FOR CIVILIANS TO BE WELL ARMED! Brutal dictators and thugs alike prefer unarmed peasants.
MrScott
Reading this bs and his Facebook posts saying he wants to be on the NRA board claiming his military service gives him some sort of special privilege shows this guy is not a friend of the constitution or the 2nd amendment.
He’s trying to play lip service and say what he thinks people want to hear, the problem is he says what anti 2nd amendment people want to hear.
Screw You.
MrScott
Reading this bs and his Facebook posts saying he wants to be on the NRA board claiming his military service gives him some sort of special privilege shows this guy is not a friend of the constitution or the 2nd amendment.
He’s trying to play lip service and say what he thinks people want to hear, the problem is he says what anti 2nd amendment people want to hear.
Screw You.
Scubadive
Mr. Webb, I very much respect your service & thank you for it. Please get your facts straight. Mass shooting are not on the rise, but in fact Gun crime & violent crime are going down in a dramatic fashion. Also if you take out Detriot, Chicago, DC, & New Orkeans….we are in the lower 3rd of the worlds gun violence. Um
Scubadive
Mr. Webb, I very much respect your service & thank you for it. Please get your facts straight. Mass shooting are not on the rise, but in fact Gun crime & violent crime are going down in a dramatic fashion. Also if you take out Detriot, Chicago, DC, & New Orkeans….we are in the lower 3rd of the worlds gun violence. Um
speedracer392
You’re a socialist raised Canadian born usurping infiltrator. Now, maybe that needs more
clairification by you but, it’s what I see. I wouldn’t trust you as far as I could throw my house.
You’re just a plant coming off like your for and all about the 2nd Amendment! I wouldn’t elect
you dog catcher. You believe in permitting and compromise on the 2nd Amendment. My 2nd
Amendment right shouldn’t involve permitting or a compromise to own a firearm. Permitting,
universal registration and background checks inevitably leads to firearm confiscation later,
period.
I could careless about your creditials and qualifications you boast about on the SOFREP website.
You are not some special unique snowflake and in no way gain any credibility with me in regards
to your past in the military. It does not make you the all knowing and all seeing arbiter of reason.
Turn your quote from Winston Churchill in on yourself and the obvious fact that your here using
the INTERNET to opine your opinions while you critcize others for doing exactly the same thing
you’re doing here, just to try and get elected. And, yes, it’s true, you can’t have a conversation with a fanatic, take a look in the mirror.
The reason you see hate and name calling, it is only because only those who are doing it see
you for who and what you really are. They see you as just another stab or chip at our God given
right to a 2nd Amendment to own firearms and, it’s to be untampered with!
You should be tough enough to take the name calling and the so-called hate and not cry like
baby when it does happen, you put yourself here, now take it. If you can’t stand the heat then,
get out of the kitchen. These people as myself are impassioned for their country and the
Republic for which it stands, freedom, (which is dwindling away with infiltrating usurpers like you,
you remind me of John McCain!), it is unlike any in the rest of the world.
If you want to do something then go after the people who are and have been destroying and
eroding the moral fabric of America. This is the problem, not the firearm. This country has been
raising amoral, entitlement minded animals for the past 30 years! By the way, for your information
up until the mid 60’s high schools in America had rifle ranges and practice as part of school
curriculum and where taught FIREARM SAFETY THERE! So, you might want to get your facts
straight.
There shall be NO compromise on the 2nd Amendment, period! We are not socialized Europe.
And, if that’s what you want then, leave and go to a place more suitable to your liking, see
above.
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.
Marcus Tullius Cicero
speedracer392
You’re a socialist raised Canadian born usurping infiltrator. Now, maybe that needs more
clairification by you but, it’s what I see. I wouldn’t trust you as far as I could throw my house.
You’re just a plant coming off like your for and all about the 2nd Amendment! I wouldn’t elect
you dog catcher. You believe in permitting and compromise on the 2nd Amendment. My 2nd
Amendment right shouldn’t involve permitting or a compromise to own a firearm. Permitting,
universal registration and background checks inevitably leads to firearm confiscation later,
period.
I could careless about your creditials and qualifications you boast about on the SOFREP website.
You are not some special unique snowflake and in no way gain any credibility with me in regards
to your past in the military. It does not make you the all knowing and all seeing arbiter of reason.
Turn your quote from Winston Churchill in on yourself and the obvious fact that your here using
the INTERNET to opine your opinions while you critcize others for doing exactly the same thing
you’re doing here, just to try and get elected. And, yes, it’s true, you can’t have a conversation with a fanatic, take a look in the mirror.
The reason you see hate and name calling, it is only because only those who are doing it see
you for who and what you really are. They see you as just another stab or chip at our God given
right to a 2nd Amendment to own firearms and, it’s to be untampered with!
You should be tough enough to take the name calling and the so-called hate and not cry like
baby when it does happen, you put yourself here, now take it. If you can’t stand the heat then,
get out of the kitchen. These people as myself are impassioned for their country and the
Republic for which it stands, freedom, (which is dwindling away with infiltrating usurpers like you,
you remind me of John McCain!), it is unlike any in the rest of the world.
If you want to do something then go after the people who are and have been destroying and
eroding the moral fabric of America. This is the problem, not the firearm. This country has been
raising amoral, entitlement minded animals for the past 30 years! By the way, for your information
up until the mid 60’s high schools in America had rifle ranges and practice as part of school
curriculum and where taught FIREARM SAFETY THERE! So, you might want to get your facts
straight.
There shall be NO compromise on the 2nd Amendment, period! We are not socialized Europe.
And, if that’s what you want then, leave and go to a place more suitable to your liking, see
above.
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.
Marcus Tullius Cicero
speedracer392
You’re a socialist raised Canadian born usurping infiltrator. Now, maybe that needs more
clairification by you but, it’s what I see. I wouldn’t trust you as far as I could throw my house.
You’re just a plant coming off like your for and all about the 2nd Amendment! I wouldn’t elect
you dog catcher. You believe in permitting and compromise on the 2nd Amendment. My 2nd
Amendment right shouldn’t involve permitting or a compromise to own a firearm. Permitting,
universal registration and background checks inevitably leads to firearm confiscation later,
period.
I could careless about your creditials and qualifications you boast about on the SOFREP website.
You are not some special unique snowflake and in no way gain any credibility with me in regards
to your past in the military. It does not make you the all knowing and all seeing arbiter of reason.
Turn your quote from Winston Churchill in on yourself and the obvious fact that your here using
the INTERNET to opine your opinions while you critcize others for doing exactly the same thing
you’re doing here, just to try and get elected. And, yes, it’s true, you can’t have a conversation with a fanatic, take a look in the mirror.
The reason you see hate and name calling, it is only because only those who are doing it see
you for who and what you really are. They see you as just another stab or chip at our God given
right to a 2nd Amendment to own firearms and, it’s to be untampered with!
You should be tough enough to take the name calling and the so-called hate and not cry like
baby when it does happen, you put yourself here, now take it. If you can’t stand the heat then,
get out of the kitchen. These people as myself are impassioned for their country and the
Republic for which it stands, freedom, (which is dwindling away with infiltrating usurpers like you,
you remind me of John McCain!), it is unlike any in the rest of the world.
If you want to do something then go after the people who are and have been destroying and
eroding the moral fabric of America. This is the problem, not the firearm. This country has been
raising amoral, entitlement minded animals for the past 30 years! By the way, for your information
up until the mid 60’s high schools in America had rifle ranges and practice as part of school
curriculum and where taught FIREARM SAFETY THERE! So, you might want to get your facts
straight.
There shall be NO compromise on the 2nd Amendment, period! We are not socialized Europe.
And, if that’s what you want then, leave and go to a place more suitable to your liking, see
above.
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.
Marcus Tullius Cicero
speedracer392
You’re a socialist raised Canadian born usurping infiltrator. Now, maybe that needs more
clairification by you but, it’s what I see. I wouldn’t trust you as far as I could throw my house.
You’re just a plant coming off like your for and all about the 2nd Amendment! I wouldn’t elect
you dog catcher. You believe in permitting and compromise on the 2nd Amendment. My 2nd
Amendment right shouldn’t involve permitting or a compromise to own a firearm. Permitting,
universal registration and background checks inevitably leads to firearm confiscation later,
period.
I could careless about your creditials and qualifications you boast about on the SOFREP website.
You are not some special unique snowflake and in no way gain any credibility with me in regards
to your past in the military. It does not make you the all knowing and all seeing arbiter of reason.
Turn your quote from Winston Churchill in on yourself and the obvious fact that your here using
the INTERNET to opine your opinions while you critcize others for doing exactly the same thing
you’re doing here, just to try and get elected. And, yes, it’s true, you can’t have a conversation with a fanatic, take a look in the mirror.
The reason you see hate and name calling, it is only because only those who are doing it see
you for who and what you really are. They see you as just another stab or chip at our God given
right to a 2nd Amendment to own firearms and, it’s to be untampered with!
You should be tough enough to take the name calling and the so-called hate and not cry like
baby when it does happen, you put yourself here, now take it. If you can’t stand the heat then,
get out of the kitchen. These people as myself are impassioned for their country and the
Republic for which it stands, freedom, (which is dwindling away with infiltrating usurpers like you,
you remind me of John McCain!), it is unlike any in the rest of the world.
If you want to do something then go after the people who are and have been destroying and
eroding the moral fabric of America. This is the problem, not the firearm. This country has been
raising amoral, entitlement minded animals for the past 30 years! By the way, for your information
up until the mid 60’s high schools in America had rifle ranges and practice as part of school
curriculum and where taught FIREARM SAFETY THERE! So, you might want to get your facts
straight.
There shall be NO compromise on the 2nd Amendment, period! We are not socialized Europe.
And, if that’s what you want then, leave and go to a place more suitable to your liking, see
above.
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.
Marcus Tullius Cicero
JimMapes
Well sir, as many have stated, you may have a military background, but your understanding of firearms and rights seems light on the essential underpinning of the 2nd Amendment’s guarantee of right. Hunting have really nothing to do with it, unless tyrants are the game.
Military experience and “I’m a hunter” are the cloaks that several have worn in the past who have eroded our rights, or groups like the Hunter for Gun Control.
On your other page you do show a better prospectus, ie a firearms owner should be able to own whatever type they want if they are a citizen in good standing. Suppressors & autos being under the NFA is an infringement, and especially with suppressors, a denial of access to an important safety device that nearly any home owner should have on a defensive weapon.
I do think though, your being raised in California and not being a shooter growing up shows in the unqualified basis of your support of the 2A. Look at some history, ours, and theirs (Germany, Russia, China et al) and get a real clear picture that goes back to ancient times, of the abuses of power by government on unarmed populace.
JimMapes
Well sir, as many have stated, you may have a military background, but your understanding of firearms and rights seems light on the essential underpinning of the 2nd Amendment’s guarantee of right. Hunting have really nothing to do with it, unless tyrants are the game.
Military experience and “I’m a hunter” are the cloaks that several have worn in the past who have eroded our rights, or groups like the Hunter for Gun Control.
On your other page you do show a better prospectus, ie a firearms owner should be able to own whatever type they want if they are a citizen in good standing. Suppressors & autos being under the NFA is an infringement, and especially with suppressors, a denial of access to an important safety device that nearly any home owner should have on a defensive weapon.
I do think though, your being raised in California and not being a shooter growing up shows in the unqualified basis of your support of the 2A. Look at some history, ours, and theirs (Germany, Russia, China et al) and get a real clear picture that goes back to ancient times, of the abuses of power by government on unarmed populace.
speedracer392
@Brandon Webb: Here’s how I judge the content of your character and who you are. You’ve
complained about the name calling and how people make ridiculous emotion-based (not fact-
based) assumptions.
Well, right here below is a testament to some of you own, which begins with “I think”, very telling
and, that’s the problem, you thought. Your “thinking” isn’t a very just and reasonable way to
criticize with your emotional based assumptions in how Mr. LaPierre does his job, which by the
way has been an outstanding one over the years. He has done a fine job in protecting our 2nd
Amendment rights!
You see, it’s your bad mouthing that you’ve done. You belong to a group, an association, sort of
a tribe, a brotherhood etc., and with the smart assed emotional candor that you’ve used on the
SOFREP website, is or can be classified as hypocritical and, mostly back stabbing & two faced.
Now, if there was anyone who I wouldn’t want to be protecting my back, it is someone like
yourself. This demonstrates that you lack loyalty, honor, virtue, respect and class.
QUOTE FROM SOFREP WEBSITE, BRANDON WEBB:
“I think the current NRA Executive VP Wayne LaPierre, a career lobbyist, is unfit to lead the NRA
into the 21st Century. I wouldn’t let him lead my kids camping trip, let alone the NRA. This may
make some angry, but I would be dishonest if I didn’t make my opinion on LaPeirre perfectly
clear, see you in 2015 Wayne.”
ANOTHER QUOTE FROM SOFREP, BRANDON WEBB:
“They are the future, and there’s a decline in youth participation in firearms sports.”
Are you seriously blaming the decline on the NRA under the leadership of Mr. LaPierre? Such a
ridiculous notion
.
Have you thought about the school systems (and the Dept. of Education!) throughout America
and they’re attack on the moral fiber of this country and how kids are educated or the socialist
liberal democratic politicians and some republicans who pervert the system from the inside. Kids
who get persecuted for drawing a stick pistol or making their pop tart into a gun are severely
punished and ostracized.
It’s the pervasive liberal mindset that is indoctrinating the children of America turning them into
useful idiots, pussies and sheep. Another, take a look at the news, from ABC, CBS, MSNBC,
CNN and NBC it is a constant attack and mockery of the 2nd Amendment, along with the people
who stand up for the right to bear arms!
Like I mentioned before, I repeat, up until the mid 60’s high schools in America had rifle ranges
and practice as part of their school curriculum and were taught FIREARM SAFETY THERE! So,
you might want to get your facts and your head screwed on straight. The 2nd Amendment is not
a car, it is part of our Constitution, part of our inalienable rights.
In the end, because of your favorable stance towards compromise and permitting, I think your just as culpable as the aforementioned.
speedracer392
@Brandon Webb: Here’s how I judge the content of your character and who you are. You’ve
complained about the name calling and how people make ridiculous emotion-based (not fact-
based) assumptions.
Well, right here below is a testament to some of you own, which begins with “I think”, very telling
and, that’s the problem, you thought. Your “thinking” isn’t a very just and reasonable way to
criticize with your emotional based assumptions in how Mr. LaPierre does his job, which by the
way has been an outstanding one over the years. He has done a fine job in protecting our 2nd
Amendment rights!
You see, it’s your bad mouthing that you’ve done. You belong to a group, an association, sort of
a tribe, a brotherhood etc., and with the smart assed emotional candor that you’ve used on the
SOFREP website, is or can be classified as hypocritical and, mostly back stabbing & two faced.
Now, if there was anyone who I wouldn’t want to be protecting my back, it is someone like
yourself. This demonstrates that you lack loyalty, honor, virtue, respect and class.
QUOTE FROM SOFREP WEBSITE, BRANDON WEBB:
“I think the current NRA Executive VP Wayne LaPierre, a career lobbyist, is unfit to lead the NRA
into the 21st Century. I wouldn’t let him lead my kids camping trip, let alone the NRA. This may
make some angry, but I would be dishonest if I didn’t make my opinion on LaPeirre perfectly
clear, see you in 2015 Wayne.”
ANOTHER QUOTE FROM SOFREP, BRANDON WEBB:
“They are the future, and there’s a decline in youth participation in firearms sports.”
Are you seriously blaming the decline on the NRA under the leadership of Mr. LaPierre? Such a
ridiculous notion
.
Have you thought about the school systems (and the Dept. of Education!) throughout America
and they’re attack on the moral fiber of this country and how kids are educated or the socialist
liberal democratic politicians and some republicans who pervert the system from the inside. Kids
who get persecuted for drawing a stick pistol or making their pop tart into a gun are severely
punished and ostracized.
It’s the pervasive liberal mindset that is indoctrinating the children of America turning them into
useful idiots, pussies and sheep. Another, take a look at the news, from ABC, CBS, MSNBC,
CNN and NBC it is a constant attack and mockery of the 2nd Amendment, along with the people
who stand up for the right to bear arms!
Like I mentioned before, I repeat, up until the mid 60’s high schools in America had rifle ranges
and practice as part of their school curriculum and were taught FIREARM SAFETY THERE! So,
you might want to get your facts and your head screwed on straight. The 2nd Amendment is not
a car, it is part of our Constitution, part of our inalienable rights.
In the end, because of your favorable stance towards compromise and permitting, I think your just as culpable as the aforementioned.
templar 6
Well, it appears Mr. Webb is a gun control advocate and homosexual supporter. Read latest issue of SOFREP for his support and admiration of a Gay SEAL. Everyone is of course entitled to their view and support of the Gay community. This is a very politically correct perspective of the inner circle of journalism which should lead to a greater acceptance in that group for him. He used his on-line magazine to support this cause and turned off course from the intent of the stated goals in my opinion. Which is fine and his right. However this is an indicator of what he would do as a person involved in the leadership of the NRA. Once in place who could predict his path. He would also make great political hay for the left as a former Navy SEAL if he strayed from course following his own path. Just because you are a former Navy SEAL doesn’t mean you are above criticism. I don’t question his honor or service to this nation. I do not however wish this person on the NRA board or involved with the NRA or matters of gun rights to have a vioce on our behalf. Thank you for your service, now good bye!
templar 6
Well, it appears Mr. Webb is a gun control advocate and homosexual supporter. Read latest issue of SOFREP for his support and admiration of a Gay SEAL. Everyone is of course entitled to their view and support of the Gay community. This is a very politically correct perspective of the inner circle of journalism which should lead to a greater acceptance in that group for him. He used his on-line magazine to support this cause and turned off course from the intent of the stated goals in my opinion. Which is fine and his right. However this is an indicator of what he would do as a person involved in the leadership of the NRA. Once in place who could predict his path. He would also make great political hay for the left as a former Navy SEAL if he strayed from course following his own path. Just because you are a former Navy SEAL doesn’t mean you are above criticism. I don’t question his honor or service to this nation. I do not however wish this person on the NRA board or involved with the NRA or matters of gun rights to have a vioce on our behalf. Thank you for your service, now good bye!
big_hatdance
templar 6 You’ll get a lot of hate for your reply but I think you raise a valid concern. No one cared or needed to know that this guy was gay so much as he needed and wanted everyone to know that he was.
Other than the fact that the left really wants this to be an issue, it isn’t…. so why put it out there? It has me scratching my head and I’ll agree to disagree with him on politics.
big_hatdance
templar 6 You’ll get a lot of hate for your reply but I think you raise a valid concern. No one cared or needed to know that this guy was gay so much as he needed and wanted everyone to know that he was.
Other than the fact that the left really wants this to be an issue, it isn’t…. so why put it out there? It has me scratching my head and I’ll agree to disagree with him on politics.
big_hatdance
templar 6 You’ll get a lot of hate for your reply but I think you raise a valid concern. No one cared or needed to know that this guy was gay so much as he needed and wanted everyone to know that he was.
Other than the fact that the left really wants this to be an issue, it isn’t…. so why put it out there? It has me scratching my head and I’ll agree to disagree with him on politics.
big_hatdance
templar 6 You’ll get a lot of hate for your reply but I think you raise a valid concern. No one cared or needed to know that this guy was gay so much as he needed and wanted everyone to know that he was.
Other than the fact that the left really wants this to be an issue, it isn’t…. so why put it out there? It has me scratching my head and I’ll agree to disagree with him on politics.
templar 6
big_hatdance templar 6 Bring the hate! When he threw his hat in the ring for
the NRA board of directors that changed the game. I expressed some of these same thoughts as a
subscriber on his SOFREP board in response to his “Gay article”. I
have no concerns for his support of Gays and transsexuals. My concern is he
overlapped that support with a military informational journal that he says is
different and focused on real information journalism of the past. This was tabloid
level back alley journalism at best. I could
have read that in the “National inquirer” or “Huffington post”. My disagreeing
comment was immediately removed by him and filtered. Nothing rude nor ugly just
decent. That’s his choice he can do as he wishes in his forum and blog. But that’s
a pretty clear indicator of his style and methods. Will he apply that same type
of attitude as a director at the NRA? Decent will not be tolerated and will
those that disagree be diminished? By criticizing him I’m not attacking the
military community. He is not representing that community any longer, that’s history
and he is not acting in that capacity. He is now a professional journalist which
subject him to criticism of the masses when he runs for elected office. I was also
served in combat operations. I was not a member of the SEALs or any special
thingee or group. I just worked as an average slug Joe nobody… That and five
dollars gets you a cup of coffee. You can only ride off the fumes of that for
so long. It doesn’t give you a life-time pass for arrogance and
self-entitlement. I submit Mr. Webb wrote and submitted the article to
further his on line site and garner greater support among those left of center
folks while appeasing a greater subscriber base to secure more money, it’s just
business. One can only conclude that he will do the
same if elected to a post with the NRA. He is a closet liberal who seeks to
appease and compromise. I firmly believe
he seeks this post to further his career and increase his public footprint and
little more thereby increasing sales. Our gun rights are in jeopardy enough we
don’t need another appeaser or any compromise.
templar 6
big_hatdance templar 6 Bring the hate! When he threw his hat in the ring for
the NRA board of directors that changed the game. I expressed some of these same thoughts as a
subscriber on his SOFREP board in response to his “Gay article”. I
have no concerns for his support of Gays and transsexuals. My concern is he
overlapped that support with a military informational journal that he says is
different and focused on real information journalism of the past. This was tabloid
level back alley journalism at best. I could
have read that in the “National inquirer” or “Huffington post”. My disagreeing
comment was immediately removed by him and filtered. Nothing rude nor ugly just
decent. That’s his choice he can do as he wishes in his forum and blog. But that’s
a pretty clear indicator of his style and methods. Will he apply that same type
of attitude as a director at the NRA? Decent will not be tolerated and will
those that disagree be diminished? By criticizing him I’m not attacking the
military community. He is not representing that community any longer, that’s history
and he is not acting in that capacity. He is now a professional journalist which
subject him to criticism of the masses when he runs for elected office. I was also
served in combat operations. I was not a member of the SEALs or any special
thingee or group. I just worked as an average slug Joe nobody… That and five
dollars gets you a cup of coffee. You can only ride off the fumes of that for
so long. It doesn’t give you a life-time pass for arrogance and
self-entitlement. I submit Mr. Webb wrote and submitted the article to
further his on line site and garner greater support among those left of center
folks while appeasing a greater subscriber base to secure more money, it’s just
business. One can only conclude that he will do the
same if elected to a post with the NRA. He is a closet liberal who seeks to
appease and compromise. I firmly believe
he seeks this post to further his career and increase his public footprint and
little more thereby increasing sales. Our gun rights are in jeopardy enough we
don’t need another appeaser or any compromise.
Waterborne
Compromise is something the law abiding are forced to do while the criminals are excused. Before i have to give up any more of my freedoms liberties and abilities to defend myself and my family, First take away the criminals rights and abilities to harm me and my family.
And If the law abiding public were supported by law enforcement and yhe courts to lawfully defend themselves, instead of being prosicuted for it, there would be far less ‘gun violence’ in any society, even a well armed one.
Focus on the criminals first, then we’ll sit down and discuss compromising our rights even more.
Life Member since 2003
US Army Sharpshooter
ps, i’ll still vote for you though, maybe you and ted could team up as a duo… haha ;o)
Waterborne
Compromise is something the law abiding are forced to do while the criminals are excused. Before i have to give up any more of my freedoms liberties and abilities to defend myself and my family, First take away the criminals rights and abilities to harm me and my family.
And If the law abiding public were supported by law enforcement and yhe courts to lawfully defend themselves, instead of being prosicuted for it, there would be far less ‘gun violence’ in any society, even a well armed one.
Focus on the criminals first, then we’ll sit down and discuss compromising our rights even more.
Life Member since 2003
US Army Sharpshooter
ps, i’ll still vote for you though, maybe you and ted could team up as a duo… haha ;o)
Waypasthadenough
Governments
will always be able to get guns so we must always be better armed than them. If the goal is not to destroy ‘gun control’ in all it’s forms then it’s no goal at all.
Here’s what the http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Second+Amendment
actually means regardless of how much our domestic blood enemies with
white skin, the “Liberal”(commie) trash and other assorted
authoritarians lie about it:
The right of the people to overthrow or prevent tyrannical or
authoritarian government by force of individually owned arms, purchased
or manufactured without government permission or taxes levied or paid,
inferior to, equal to or superior to those commonly carried by soldiers,
marines, sailors or militia members of any fighting force in the world
shall not be brought into question. The right of the people to protect
themselves from criminals in government, or any institution that may
seek authority over them or from any common street criminal shall not be
brought into question. Those elected, hired or appointed public
servants who do question this proclamation and/or the people’s natural,
most basic right, that all our other rights are based upon, that of self
defense, shall be arrested, tried for treason and executed.
There’s no such thing as a good ‘gun law.’ All gun control is
propaganda designed to condition the sheeple to accept more control with
total civilian disarmament being the final objective thus all gun
control is an act of war. All who forward it should be arrested, tried
for treason against human Liberty and executed.
The
Second Amendment, as the rest of the Bill of Rights, is an
acknowledgement of our natural born rights, not a granting. The entire
Bill of Rights is about keeping the governments in their place as our
servants, not our masters. The Second Amendment is about the common
person’s right to own weapons of war so that we can keep the
governments in their place by keeping the ‘monopoly on force’ in the
hands of the people where it belongs, as in ‘We the people.’ Remember
that? It will not be infringed any further and the ‘gun laws’ in
existence will be repealed. End of discussion.
I’m a
vet, do ya’ want to thank me?:
http://www.freekentucky.com/im-a-vet-do-ya-want-to-thank-me/
Don’t
understand my bad attitude? Start here: http://www.freekentucky.com/the-must-readwatch-page/
Act
politically but prep for what history shows will have to be done. It’s way past
time to prep for what will be required: http://www.freekentucky.com/what-will-be-required/
Waypasthadenough
Governments
will always be able to get guns so we must always be better armed than them. If the goal is not to destroy ‘gun control’ in all it’s forms then it’s no goal at all.
Here’s what the http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Second+Amendment
actually means regardless of how much our domestic blood enemies with
white skin, the “Liberal”(commie) trash and other assorted
authoritarians lie about it:
The right of the people to overthrow or prevent tyrannical or
authoritarian government by force of individually owned arms, purchased
or manufactured without government permission or taxes levied or paid,
inferior to, equal to or superior to those commonly carried by soldiers,
marines, sailors or militia members of any fighting force in the world
shall not be brought into question. The right of the people to protect
themselves from criminals in government, or any institution that may
seek authority over them or from any common street criminal shall not be
brought into question. Those elected, hired or appointed public
servants who do question this proclamation and/or the people’s natural,
most basic right, that all our other rights are based upon, that of self
defense, shall be arrested, tried for treason and executed.
There’s no such thing as a good ‘gun law.’ All gun control is
propaganda designed to condition the sheeple to accept more control with
total civilian disarmament being the final objective thus all gun
control is an act of war. All who forward it should be arrested, tried
for treason against human Liberty and executed.
The
Second Amendment, as the rest of the Bill of Rights, is an
acknowledgement of our natural born rights, not a granting. The entire
Bill of Rights is about keeping the governments in their place as our
servants, not our masters. The Second Amendment is about the common
person’s right to own weapons of war so that we can keep the
governments in their place by keeping the ‘monopoly on force’ in the
hands of the people where it belongs, as in ‘We the people.’ Remember
that? It will not be infringed any further and the ‘gun laws’ in
existence will be repealed. End of discussion.
I’m a
vet, do ya’ want to thank me?:
http://www.freekentucky.com/im-a-vet-do-ya-want-to-thank-me/
Don’t
understand my bad attitude? Start here: http://www.freekentucky.com/the-must-readwatch-page/
Act
politically but prep for what history shows will have to be done. It’s way past
time to prep for what will be required: http://www.freekentucky.com/what-will-be-required/