| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/16/2013 09:39:43 PM · #626 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by mike_311:
you mean there was reason to go after handguns too and the media screwed it up? |
The handguns were semi-automatic, too:
Guns Used in Newtown Shooting |
Yes all modern handguns that are made except revolvers are semi-auto. The first semi-auto handgun was made over 100 years ago. Not sure of your point by this statement? |
|
|
|
01/16/2013 09:48:12 PM · #627 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by mike_311:
you mean there was reason to go after handguns too and the media screwed it up? |
The handguns were semi-automatic, too:
Guns Used in Newtown Shooting |
Yes all modern handguns that are made except revolvers are semi-auto. The first semi-auto handgun was made over 100 years ago. Not sure of your point by this statement? |
According to the article, some of those semi-automatic handguns also use large-capacity magazines. |
|
|
|
01/16/2013 10:37:32 PM · #628 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by mike_311:
you mean there was reason to go after handguns too and the media screwed it up? |
The handguns were semi-automatic, too:
Guns Used in Newtown Shooting |
Yes all modern handguns that are made except revolvers are semi-auto. The first semi-auto handgun was made over 100 years ago. Not sure of your point by this statement? |
According to the article, some of those semi-automatic handguns also use large-capacity magazines. |
Her point is quite clear.
Slippery slope is a myth huh?
|
|
|
|
01/16/2013 11:19:22 PM · #629 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by Flash:
I couldn't open Cory's link and this was so incredible to me I did my own google and found this NBC report from Jan 15th. If this is true, then can anyone tell me how I am supposed to trust a president bent on banning assault style rifles and use this tragedy as the backdrop - when no rifle was used. Just amazing! 30 days of blame on a gun that wasn't even used in this carnage.
NBC report from Today Jan 15th |
That report is not from January 15th, it's from December 15th, one day after the shooting. The date appears on the face of the video underneath and to the right of the word "Today," and if you watch the video it's clear that it's a report that was filed around the time of the shooting, when there was a lot of incorrect information being reported. |
Thanks Judith. I truly questioned this. It just wasn't passing the smell test to me. I had heard early on that it was only handguns but dismissed that due to the volume of reporting clearly defining the weapon as a .223 AR15. I also found it incredible that I could not find any other mention of this. I missed the date in the corner of the video. |
|
|
|
01/16/2013 11:30:46 PM · #630 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by mike_311:
you mean there was reason to go after handguns too and the media screwed it up? |
The handguns were semi-automatic, too:
Guns Used in Newtown Shooting |
Yes all modern handguns that are made except revolvers are semi-auto. The first semi-auto handgun was made over 100 years ago. Not sure of your point by this statement? |
According to the article, some of those semi-automatic handguns also use large-capacity magazines. |
Yes, most of the modern semi-auto handguns have magazines with a capacity greater than 7 rounds. |
|
|
|
01/16/2013 11:39:52 PM · #631 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Flash:
... how I am supposed to trust a president bent on banning assault style rifles and use this tragedy as the backdrop - when no rifle was used. Just amazing! |
What can I say  Flash... some other President sent a boatload of Americans to war where thousands were killed all because of the belief that Weapons of Mass Destruction were going to be used on some poor unsuspecting nation... and to this date none were ever found...go figure.
Ray |
The point here - I think - is that those on my side of this have been claiming that this is agenda driven while those on the opposite side have been repeatedly asking "is there any reasonable restrictions that could be supported by gun owners"? This information simply enforces the notion that this has nothing to do with "assault" rifles and much more to do with an agenda to remove as many guns from the populace as possible.
Today the president had 4 childern as guests and looked into teh camera and said "nothing is more important than protecting these innocent lives". The same president who blatantly made womens reprioductive rights a central issue of the last campaign. There are no lives more "innocent" than those who are still in the womb - totally dependent upon the mother - yet this president has the gall to claim "innocent lives" as the catalyst for new gun control measures.
When are the real factors of gun violence going to be addressed? When are the inner city gang/drug problems going to be addressed? Chicago? Detroit? Flint? DC? LA? When is this president (from Chicago) going to accurately define the problem with gun violence as too much crime? To ban a rifle for a pistol grip is the height of ignorance. |
|
|
|
01/16/2013 11:48:33 PM · #632 |
Here is an excerpt from a CNN article a couple of days ago...
Rod Dreher wrote:
"Yesterday the Baton Rouge Advocate published a lengthy analysis of the 2012 murder stats in the city. Take a look at this PDF of one of the inside pages. Last year, 83 people died by homicide in Baton Rouge. Of that number, 87% were black, and 87% were male. Two-thirds had been in trouble with the law before, and one-third had been in trouble with the law for drugs. The median age of victims: 26.
"Of the perpetrators, the median age was 22. Get this: 96% of them were black, and 90% were male. Almost two-thirds had previous arrests. One out of four had a drug record.
"Most of the murders took place in the poorest parts of the city.
"What can we learn from these statistics? That murder in Baton Rouge is almost entirely about young black men from the poor part of town killing other young black men from the poor part of town. It's mostly a matter of thugs killing thugs."
Remember that when reading gun stats, persons up to age 26 are often included as "children". Not sure about you, but by 26 I was working, buying my first small house, and had bought a couple of cars. A long way from being classiifed as a child. The issue is crime. Plain and simple. The stats above for Baton Rouge could be applied to nearly every major inner city in the country. From Miami to Milwaukee. |
|
|
|
01/16/2013 11:58:02 PM · #633 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Here is an excerpt from a CNN article a couple of days ago...
Rod Dreher wrote:
"Yesterday the Baton Rouge Advocate published a lengthy analysis of the 2012 murder stats in the city. Take a look at this PDF of one of the inside pages. Last year, 83 people died by homicide in Baton Rouge. Of that number, 87% were black, and 87% were male. Two-thirds had been in trouble with the law before, and one-third had been in trouble with the law for drugs. The median age of victims: 26.
"Of the perpetrators, the median age was 22. Get this: 96% of them were black, and 90% were male. Almost two-thirds had previous arrests. One out of four had a drug record.
"Most of the murders took place in the poorest parts of the city.
"What can we learn from these statistics? That murder in Baton Rouge is almost entirely about young black men from the poor part of town killing other young black men from the poor part of town. It's mostly a matter of thugs killing thugs."
Remember that when reading gun stats, persons up to age 26 are often included as "children". Not sure about you, but by 26 I was working, buying my first small house, and had bought a couple of cars. A long way from being classiifed as a child. The issue is crime. Plain and simple. The stats above for Baton Rouge could be applied to nearly every major inner city in the country. From Miami to Milwaukee. |
[satire tag] So, basically, we can make inroads on the problem by incarcerating all the poor, young, black people? Oh, wait... We've already tried that. Isn't working...
No, wait, here's a brilliant idea, it'll take care of the tax scofflaws too, and ease population pressure: let's just EUTHANIZE every individual who pays less than, say, $2,500 in Federal Income Tax each year. There's probably a few kinks to be ironed out in this idea, but that's true of all great ideas, right? [/satire tag] |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 08:53:01 AM · #634 |
Bear...Flash has a point. I live in Louisiana and I have travelled many times to New Orleans / Baton Rouge...There are some places that I will not go without a gun...There are also a few places where I just will not go (gun or not). The poverty is a problem. The thing is these people, most have never had a job, (I know I am generalizing...not all of the people in these areas are like this) and they expect a handout from the govmt. Their solution is to break into peoples houses, carjack, or a ton of other things. I will bring up the lower 9th ward after Katrina. When they fled to other cities crime skyrocketed. I will use Houston as an example. They will no longer accept refugees because of the lower 9th ward folks. I live in Monroe (NE Louisiana) after Katrina we had our 1st drive-by on the North side. They found out that it was a hood from New Orleans. This is why weapons for law abiding people are necessary.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2013 10:58:34 AM · #635 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Bear...Flash has a point. I live in Louisiana and I have travelled many times to New Orleans / Baton Rouge...There are some places that I will not go without a gun...There are also a few places where I just will not go (gun or not). The poverty is a problem. The thing is these people, most have never had a job, (I know I am generalizing...not all of the people in these areas are like this) and they expect a handout from the govmt. Their solution is to break into peoples houses, carjack, or a ton of other things. I will bring up the lower 9th ward after Katrina. When they fled to other cities crime skyrocketed. I will use Houston as an example. They will no longer accept refugees because of the lower 9th ward folks. I live in Monroe (NE Louisiana) after Katrina we had our 1st drive-by on the North side. They found out that it was a hood from New Orleans. This is why weapons for law abiding people are necessary. |
If most murder is thug on thug murder as in Baton Rouge, the argument that a law abiding citizen needs a gun to prevent a murderous demise does not hold water.
Message edited by author 2013-01-17 11:00:09. |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 11:39:50 AM · #636 |
LOL the thug vs thug happens alot....But what happens when thug sees a house and wants to break in that house...This is when weapon is handy...If the thugs only killed themselves we would prob have a different conversation. Also what happens when you pull up to a redlight and someone orders you to get out of the car...I answer with 2 rounds through the door and into his stomach cavity.
FYI Louisiana is under the castle law. They have also included your vehicle into this. This means that your car is an extension of your home.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2013 01:22:43 PM · #637 |
I live 2 miles from the "Orleans Parish Border" ie, New Orleans. While I occaisionally go in to town for a concert at the New Orleans arena, I RARELY if EVER go just to shop or drink in the Quarter. In fact, the last concert was Lady Antibellum and that was at the Lakefront Arena, north of the city on a college campus and it had a heavy police presence.
Gun or no gun, IMO the city is dangerous....and it's the thugs mentioned above. Young black men are found dead nearly EVERY DAY. However, it is not just thug on thug. We have many stray bullet killings each year. It does spill over to thug on college student violence. Tulane University is in the city. Several times in the last few months, thugs have robbed and beaten male and female students - at gunpoint. This is happening near the park close to campus. Tulane is located where we call the Garden District and the St. Charles Area, about 4 miles from the 9th ward, French Quarter and other "rough parts" of the city.
So you see, IMO when the thug decides he wants to rob a sitting duck and not get himself shot, he moves out to the non-thug area - which also happens to be a Gun Free Zone !
If possible, my family stays away. In fact, the last time I was there was the morning of the Newtown Shootings. I was taking a 10 hour Louisiana Handgun Class at a security company run by former police officers. (No kidding)
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Bear...Flash has a point. I live in Louisiana and I have travelled many times to New Orleans / Baton Rouge...There are some places that I will not go without a gun...There are also a few places where I just will not go (gun or not). The poverty is a problem. The thing is these people, most have never had a job, (I know I am generalizing...not all of the people in these areas are like this) and they expect a handout from the govmt. Their solution is to break into peoples houses, carjack, or a ton of other things. I will bring up the lower 9th ward after Katrina. When they fled to other cities crime skyrocketed. I will use Houston as an example. They will no longer accept refugees because of the lower 9th ward folks. I live in Monroe (NE Louisiana) after Katrina we had our 1st drive-by on the North side. They found out that it was a hood from New Orleans. This is why weapons for law abiding people are necessary. |
|
|
|
|
01/17/2013 01:38:03 PM · #638 |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 01:51:32 PM · #639 |
Originally posted by slightly_biased_individual:
No corporation, lobby, or political action committee had any part in the creation or funding of this educational project. It is solely the work of an individual. |
I started reading this thread again, against my better judgement, but reading that entire thing and searching up his sources there's a slight bias in his presentation.
The US can keep all the arms they want, I don't have a horse in the race. All I know is the US has, and will probably maintain, the highest per capita murder rate via firearms for any industrialized nation for a long while. One I hope you keep indefinitely. |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 02:09:34 PM · #640 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Bear...Flash has a point. I live in Louisiana and I have travelled many times to New Orleans / Baton Rouge...There are some places that I will not go without a gun...There are also a few places where I just will not go (gun or not). The poverty is a problem. The thing is these people, most have never had a job, (I know I am generalizing...not all of the people in these areas are like this) and they expect a handout from the govmt. Their solution is to break into peoples houses, carjack, or a ton of other things. I will bring up the lower 9th ward after Katrina. When they fled to other cities crime skyrocketed. I will use Houston as an example. They will no longer accept refugees because of the lower 9th ward folks. I live in Monroe (NE Louisiana) after Katrina we had our 1st drive-by on the North side. They found out that it was a hood from New Orleans. This is why weapons for law abiding people are necessary. |
If most murder is thug on thug murder as in Baton Rouge, the argument that a law abiding citizen needs a gun to prevent a murderous demise does not hold water. |
Likewise for drive-by shootings. I imagine the best prevention of a drive-by would be preventing that thug from acquiring a weapon in the first place. |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 02:20:53 PM · #641 |
I know that there will be no consensus on keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, because in the mind of the average gun owner, there is no solution to gun violence except having more guns.
The NRA and its supporters say we have enough laws, we just have to enforce them. Then it argues that groups like Mayors Against Illegal Guns should leave enforcement to the Feds, and the ATF. Then the Supreme Court told us that local government could not pass laws to limit guns, only the Feds could oversee limits.
Of course the ATF has not had a head in 6 years, and the man who is provisional head does it part time, from his home in Minnesota. Riders have been slipped into bills to no longer require annual stock reporting from dealers, to weaken penalties and raise the standard of proof in charging dealers. The ATF is legally limited to inspecting a dealer to a maximum of once a year, and their budget only allows an inspection every 17 years. We know that 52% of all guns used in crimes originate from 1% of gun dealers, but the NRA is making sure that We The People are allowed to do nothing to close them down.
I doubt those who do not own guns know that the careful background check that applicants are put through before they are allowed to purchase a gun, last less than a day. Background check records are legally required to be destroyed after 24 hours. That the ATF are not allowed to keep computer records of gun registration, all records are limited to paper, and nothing is allowed to be shared with any other agency to help investigations.
So in reality the weapons of war that are on our streets are not the primary problem; it is the fact that those who are opposed to our laws have been allowed to weaken the enforcement mechanism to the point that the ATF has virtually no power to enforce gun laws, and yet are the only agency allowed to enforce those laws. They are well funded and free to act to enforce tobacco and alcohol laws, but are handcuffed by the NRA when it comes to firearms (this at a time when the Patriot act and the like give all other federal agencies greater latitude than ever).
As our streets become battlegrounds those of us who do not see arming ourselves as the ideal response will take action. It may be banning certain types of hardware, but it would be more effective if we were allowed to enforce gun laws with vigor and logic, rather than the hobbled joke that the ATF has become. |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 02:24:35 PM · #642 |
The American version of Harry Potter
//i.imgur.com/FH9M8.gif
Message edited by Manic - please keep all images posted under 300kb and 500px, or post links or thumbnails instead. |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 02:35:37 PM · #643 |
I really liked this statement
Further illustrating the small role so-called assault weapons play in crime, FBI data shows that 323 murders were committed with rifles of any kind in 2011. In comparison, 496 murders were commited with hammers and clubs, and 1,694 murders were perpetrated with knives.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2013 02:38:10 PM · #644 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
I know that there will be no consensus on keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, because in the mind of the average gun owner, there is no solution to gun violence except having more guns.
The NRA and its supporters say we have enough laws, we just have to enforce them. Then it argues that groups like Mayors Against Illegal Guns should leave enforcement to the Feds, and the ATF. Then the Supreme Court told us that local government could not pass laws to limit guns, only the Feds could oversee limits.
Of course the ATF has not had a head in 6 years, and the man who is provisional head does it part time, from his home in Minnesota. Riders have been slipped into bills to no longer require annual stock reporting from dealers, to weaken penalties and raise the standard of proof in charging dealers. The ATF is legally limited to inspecting a dealer to a maximum of once a year, and their budget only allows an inspection every 17 years. We know that 52% of all guns used in crimes originate from 1% of gun dealers, but the NRA is making sure that We The People are allowed to do nothing to close them down.
I doubt those who do not own guns know that the careful background check that applicants are put through before they are allowed to purchase a gun, last less than a day. Background check records are legally required to be destroyed after 24 hours. That the ATF are not allowed to keep computer records of gun registration, all records are limited to paper, and nothing is allowed to be shared with any other agency to help investigations.
So in reality the weapons of war that are on our streets are not the primary problem; it is the fact that those who are opposed to our laws have been allowed to weaken the enforcement mechanism to the point that the ATF has virtually no power to enforce gun laws, and yet are the only agency allowed to enforce those laws. They are well funded and free to act to enforce tobacco and alcohol laws, but are handcuffed by the NRA when it comes to firearms (this at a time when the Patriot act and the like give all other federal agencies greater latitude than ever).
As our streets become battlegrounds those of us who do not see arming ourselves as the ideal response will take action. It may be banning certain types of hardware, but it would be more effective if we were allowed to enforce gun laws with vigor and logic, rather than the hobbled joke that the ATF has become. |
Exactly right, BrennanOB! The gun lobby argues ad nauseam that we're going after the wrong weapon, or the wrong ammunition, or it doesn't matter anyway about the weapon or ammunition because another will be manufactured to take its place and specifically designed to skirt the prohibitions in the law, and then every attempt is made to weaken and undermine the laws that are in place.... blah blah blah, one excuse after another... oh yeah, and if it's not guns then they'll be coming after us with knives and bats and chairs. Jesus Christ what a sickening display!! Do you gun folks have even one productive suggestion that would make a positive difference, that doesn't require more guns, that you'd be willing to commit your mouth and your money to?? |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 02:43:52 PM · #645 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I really liked this statement
Further illustrating the small role so-called assault weapons play in crime, FBI data shows that 323 murders were committed with rifles of any kind in 2011. In comparison, 496 murders were commited with hammers and clubs, and 1,694 murders were perpetrated with knives. |
Except it's wrong.
8,583 (firearms) is a bigger number than 1,694 (knives), 496 (blunt weapons), and the summation of every other category they keep track of.
So you can like the statement all you want, it's factually incorrect.
Message edited by author 2013-01-17 14:44:29. |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 02:47:02 PM · #646 |
so what would you have us do...Outlaw all guns????Have the police force disarm the people.
That sounds vaguely familiar...Let me see, was it Germany right before WW2
|
|
|
|
01/17/2013 02:51:16 PM · #647 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I really liked this statement
Further illustrating the small role so-called assault weapons play in crime, FBI data shows that 323 murders were committed with rifles of any kind in 2011. In comparison, 496 murders were commited with hammers and clubs, and 1,694 murders were perpetrated with knives. |
Except it's wrong.
8,583 (firearms) is a bigger number than 1,694 (knives), 496 (blunt weapons), and the summation of every other category they keep track of.
So you can like the statement all you want, it's factually incorrect. |
The stats were correct....This was referring to "assault weapons".....The thing everyone wants to ban....They are not talking about banning handguns or other firearms
|
|
|
|
01/17/2013 02:58:00 PM · #648 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
so what would you have us do...Outlaw all guns????Have the police force disarm the people.
That sounds vaguely familiar...Let me see, was it Germany right before WW2 |
Or how about modern day Japan where homicides by firearms are virtually non-existent.
Message edited by author 2013-01-17 14:58:09. |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 03:02:19 PM · #649 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
The stats were correct....This was referring to "assault weapons".....The thing everyone wants to ban....They are not talking about banning handguns or other firearms |
You're correct. I would still like to see further restrictions on other types of weapons. Again, I don't live in the US, so as long you turn each other into Swiss cheese, I don't really care.
Message edited by author 2013-01-17 15:16:26. |
|
|
|
01/17/2013 03:09:32 PM · #650 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
so what would you have us do...Outlaw all guns????Have the police force disarm the people.
That sounds vaguely familiar...Let me see, was it Germany right before WW2 |
Or how about modern day Japan where homicides by firearms are virtually non-existent. |
They also flock to hawaii to go to the gun ranges because they crave to have firearms. Personally I am glad that I don't live in Japan.
|
|
