Rosanne Cash says that the “N.R.A. funds domestic terrorism.” I hope more activists join her.
So I fund domestic terrorism since I am a NRA member? That s a pretty assinine statement by rosanne cash.
I'm not anti-hand gun but I have a hard time believing the NRA actually cares about any of these victims. I know you do, but the NRA certainly doesn't. In my opinion. The guy bought 36 guns in the last 12 months. The NRA fights for that right. It is obscene.
I'm going to quote myself here because again, the guy bought 36 guns in a 12 month period and the NRA supports that right.
Let's not get into semantics about the meaning of "fund". A better word would be "supports".
Rosanne Cash says that the “N.R.A. funds domestic terrorism.” I hope more activists join her.
So I fund domestic terrorism since I am a NRA member? That s a pretty assinine statement by rosanne cash.
I knew you owend weapons but didn't realize your a member damn so you pay to be a member that means you contribute to the organization no ? not that Rosanne is correct but still ....
Yeah the range I belongs to requires me to be a member. But to suggest that NRA members support domestic terrorism is really dumb. Thatcsclijecsaying I am pro oil spills since I invest in Exxon.
Not the best analogy. You're funding lobbyists whose job is to block any gun control legislation.
Yeah I've had better. I got a sick four year old hanging on my shoulder so I'm not 100% lol.
Ah i hope the kid feels better soon !
Thanks bud! We are the beginning phases of the cold...life is wonderful sometimes lol.
Rosanne Cash says that the “N.R.A. funds domestic terrorism.” I hope more activists join her.
So I fund domestic terrorism since I am a NRA member? That s a pretty assinine statement by rosanne cash.
I knew you owend weapons but didn't realize your a member damn so you pay to be a member that means you contribute to the organization no ? not that Rosanne is correct but still ....
Yeah the range I belongs to requires me to be a member. But to suggest that NRA members support domestic terrorism is really dumb. Thatcsclijecsaying I am pro oil spills since I invest in Exxon.
Not the best analogy. You're funding lobbyists whose job is to block any gun control legislation.
Yeah I've had better. I got a sick four year old hanging on my shoulder so I'm not 100% lol.
Ah i hope the kid feels better soon !
Thanks bud! We are the beginning phases of the cold...life is wonderful sometimes lol.
Enjoy it ! mine are 23 & 20 i'd give anything to be back with them at that age range anyway back to topic ...
Rosanne Cash says that the “N.R.A. funds domestic terrorism.” I hope more activists join her.
So I fund domestic terrorism since I am a NRA member? That s a pretty assinine statement by rosanne cash.
I knew you owend weapons but didn't realize your a member damn so you pay to be a member that means you contribute to the organization no ? not that Rosanne is correct but still ....
Yeah the range I belongs to requires me to be a member. But to suggest that NRA members support domestic terrorism is really dumb. Thatcsclijecsaying I am pro oil spills since I invest in Exxon.
Not the best analogy. You're funding lobbyists whose job is to block any gun control legislation.
Yeah I've had better. I got a sick four year old hanging on my shoulder so I'm not 100% lol.
Ah i hope the kid feels better soon !
Thanks bud! We are the beginning phases of the cold...life is wonderful sometimes lol.
Enjoy it ! mine are 23 & 20 i'd give anything to be back with them at that age range anyway back to topic ...
I hear ya. It is so cliche but it really does go fast. Ok, gloves back on!! I have changed my mind after this and I do feel all automatic weapons should be illegal in the u.s. Along with bump fire stocks.
Rosanne Cash says that the “N.R.A. funds domestic terrorism.” I hope more activists join her.
So I fund domestic terrorism since I am a NRA member? That s a pretty assinine statement by rosanne cash.
I knew you owend weapons but didn't realize your a member damn so you pay to be a member that means you contribute to the organization no ? not that Rosanne is correct but still ....
Yeah the range I belongs to requires me to be a member. But to suggest that NRA members support domestic terrorism is really dumb. Thatcsclijecsaying I am pro oil spills since I invest in Exxon.
Not the best analogy. You're funding lobbyists whose job is to block any gun control legislation.
Yeah I've had better. I got a sick four year old hanging on my shoulder so I'm not 100% lol.
Ah i hope the kid feels better soon !
Thanks bud! We are the beginning phases of the cold...life is wonderful sometimes lol.
Enjoy it ! mine are 23 & 20 i'd give anything to be back with them at that age range anyway back to topic ...
I hear ya. It is so cliche but it really does go fast. Ok, gloves back on!! I have changed my mind after this and I do feel all automatic weapons should be illegal in the u.s. Along with bump fire stocks.
Bravo man i'm all for gunowners rights so for you to be open about this is a breath of fresh air ....
I don't have any issue with people collecting rifles of the simple or classic variety. If someone wants 10 shotguns and 10 hunting rifles so be it. Avid hunters (such as my father used to be) find various rifles suitable for various animals.
Hunting is getting bashed as well, but as much as I seem to be getting ignored... I'll risk repeating this: shooting your meat in the forest is much more humane than buying products from large stores that ultimately encourage factory farming where animals suffer immensely. Not only that... wild meat is much healthier for the consumer as well.
It's the type of weapon (assault rifles and handguns) and large capacity magazines that need restrictions.
And Scruffy... you were taking shots there, but I have found you to be a very moderate voice in this issue despite a clear passion or enjoyment level for guns. You are also very patient with people that have taken shots at you.
I'm numb from this event. Toss in Tom Petty and what a shitty shitty weekend.
I don't have any issue with people collecting rifles of the simple or classic variety. If someone wants 10 shotguns and 10 hunting rifles so be it. Avid hunters (such as my father used to be) find various rifles suitable for various animals.
Hunting is getting bashed as well, but as much as I seem to be getting ignored... I'll risk repeating this: shooting your meat in the forest is much more humane than buying products from large stores that ultimately encourage factory farming where animals suffer immensely. Not only that... wild meat is much healthier for the consumer as well.
It's the type of weapon (assault rifles and handguns) and large capacity magazines that need restrictions.
And Scruffy... you were taking shots there, but I have found you to be a very moderate voice in this issue despite a clear passion or enjoyment level for guns. You are also very patient with people that have taken shots at you.
I'm numb from this event. Toss in Tom Petty and what a shitty shitty weekend.
Okay, but FTR, that is a blanket statement that doesn't apply to all meat, and also fails to acknowledge the relationship between humans and their impact on animal habitats.
(I concur about McGruff)
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I don't have any issue with people collecting rifles of the simple or classic variety. If someone wants 10 shotguns and 10 hunting rifles so be it. Avid hunters (such as my father used to be) find various rifles suitable for various animals.
Hunting is getting bashed as well, but as much as I seem to be getting ignored... I'll risk repeating this: shooting your meat in the forest is much more humane than buying products from large stores that ultimately encourage factory farming where animals suffer immensely. Not only that... wild meat is much healthier for the consumer as well.
It's the type of weapon (assault rifles and handguns) and large capacity magazines that need restrictions.
And Scruffy... you were taking shots there, but I have found you to be a very moderate voice in this issue despite a clear passion or enjoyment level for guns. You are also very patient with people that have taken shots at you.
I'm numb from this event. Toss in Tom Petty and what a shitty shitty weekend.
Okay, but FTR, that is a blanket statement that doesn't apply to all meat, and also fails to acknowledge the relationship between humans and their impact on animal habitats.
(I concur about McGruff)
I might need some clarification to understand what you are getting at.
I would agree that there are gross examples of hunting, but I don't think I said hunting is without flaws. In this forum I started a thread on animal abuse (I can't remember exactly what it was) and cursed hunters shooting a grizzly bear in a grotesque manner. There's another thread on factory farms and those animals and their plight is far worse than that of the bear's. Sickening really.
I'm merely trying to state that many humans eat meat. I have a little more respect for the subsistence hunter that kills his own meat than I do for myself- buying it from the butcher. Top give myself some credit... we buy from a local butcher that sells locally grown meat. It costs more, but it makes me feel a little better.
"My brain's a good brain!"
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,761
omg it's like they're just throwing their hands in the air and giving up...like it's impossible to do anything at all. I'm stunned. This can't be happening.
I don't have any issue with people collecting rifles of the simple or classic variety. If someone wants 10 shotguns and 10 hunting rifles so be it. Avid hunters (such as my father used to be) find various rifles suitable for various animals.
Hunting is getting bashed as well, but as much as I seem to be getting ignored... I'll risk repeating this: shooting your meat in the forest is much more humane than buying products from large stores that ultimately encourage factory farming where animals suffer immensely. Not only that... wild meat is much healthier for the consumer as well.
It's the type of weapon (assault rifles and handguns) and large capacity magazines that need restrictions.
And Scruffy... you were taking shots there, but I have found you to be a very moderate voice in this issue despite a clear passion or enjoyment level for guns. You are also very patient with people that have taken shots at you.
I'm numb from this event. Toss in Tom Petty and what a shitty shitty weekend.
Okay, but FTR, that is a blanket statement that doesn't apply to all meat, and also fails to acknowledge the relationship between humans and their impact on animal habitats.
(I concur about McGruff)
I might need some clarification to understand what you are getting at.
I would agree that there are gross examples of hunting, but I don't think I said hunting is without flaws. In this forum I started a thread on animal abuse (I can't remember exactly what it was) and cursed hunters shooting a grizzly bear in a grotesque manner. There's another thread on factory farms and those animals and their plight is far worse than that of the bear's. Sickening really.
I'm merely trying to state that many humans eat meat. I have a little more respect for the subsistence hunter that kills his own meat than I do for myself- buying it from the butcher. Top give myself some credit... we buy from a local butcher that sells locally grown meat. It costs more, but it makes me feel a little better.
I eat meat too. I also already stated multiple times that necessity is an exception, so subsistence hunters are not what I'm talking about (unless they are unscrupulous about it, and some are). This is really just me picking my battles and showing a specific interest in the subject of sport hunting (eating it doesn't make it much better for me, for many reasons that I've already mentioned). I do not agree with going into the wild and killing wild animals for fun (even when there is an attempt to justify the fun by eating the dead animal afterwards). I think that the wild that we've got left should be the animals' domain, not ours. We are the interlopers out there IMO, because of the way we have encroached upon, destroyed, manipulated, and taken for granted the nature in which these animals reside. If we'd always shown respect for the land and the animals and cared about natural balances, I wouldn't saying this. It's just not fucking fair, to put it in simple terms. I also simply think it's demented to get pleasure out of killing, which is what's involved for 95% of hunters.
I agree that there are horrible abuses happening in factory farms as well - of course that dismays me greatly. I think farmed animals should be treated like gold. But that hasn't been the topic at hand (I mean, this conversation started, obviously, because gun lovers tie their defense of lax gun regulations to their desire to hunt for sport). That is great that you buy locally grown meat (I'm assuming you're implying that that means the animals are treated humanely). I too do my best to eat my protein in a responsible way.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,761
Rosanne Cash says that the “N.R.A. funds domestic terrorism.” I hope more activists join her.
So I fund domestic terrorism since I am a NRA member? That s a pretty assinine statement by rosanne cash.
McG, it's a general statement not directed at any one member. If you are an NRA member and if you don't like what's happening with all the shootings (a mass murder takes place in America everyday) you, as a member, have more influence on the NRA and how it reacts to those horrible events than those of us who are not. I hope you are pushing the NRA to be proactive in supporting background checks and making the kinds of guns that are specifically made to kill many people and illegal firearm modifications that make that more possible less available to the public.
As it stands, I have to agree, in general, to Cash's statement.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Rosanne Cash says that the “N.R.A. funds domestic terrorism.” I hope more activists join her.
So I fund domestic terrorism since I am a NRA member? That s a pretty assinine statement by rosanne cash.
McG, it's a general statement not directed at any one member. If you are an NRA member and if you don't like what's happening with all the shootings (a mass murder takes place in America everyday) you, as a member, have more influence on the NRA and how it reacts to those horrible events than those of us who are not. I hope you are pushing the NRA to be proactive in supporting background checks and making the kinds of guns that are specifically made to kill many people and illegal firearm modifications that make that more possible less available to the public.
As it stands, I have to agree, in general, to Cash's statement.
Cash's statement is pretty idiotic.
Del and Allie, thanks for the compliment. Seventeen years of teaching 8th grade and having five kids gives you patience. lol
I don't have any issue with people collecting rifles of the simple or classic variety. If someone wants 10 shotguns and 10 hunting rifles so be it. Avid hunters (such as my father used to be) find various rifles suitable for various animals.
Hunting is getting bashed as well, but as much as I seem to be getting ignored... I'll risk repeating this: shooting your meat in the forest is much more humane than buying products from large stores that ultimately encourage factory farming where animals suffer immensely. Not only that... wild meat is much healthier for the consumer as well.
It's the type of weapon (assault rifles and handguns) and large capacity magazines that need restrictions.
And Scruffy... you were taking shots there, but I have found you to be a very moderate voice in this issue despite a clear passion or enjoyment level for guns. You are also very patient with people that have taken shots at you.
I'm numb from this event. Toss in Tom Petty and what a shitty shitty weekend.
Okay, but FTR, that is a blanket statement that doesn't apply to all meat, and also fails to acknowledge the relationship between humans and their impact on animal habitats.
(I concur about McGruff)
I might need some clarification to understand what you are getting at.
I would agree that there are gross examples of hunting, but I don't think I said hunting is without flaws. In this forum I started a thread on animal abuse (I can't remember exactly what it was) and cursed hunters shooting a grizzly bear in a grotesque manner. There's another thread on factory farms and those animals and their plight is far worse than that of the bear's. Sickening really.
I'm merely trying to state that many humans eat meat. I have a little more respect for the subsistence hunter that kills his own meat than I do for myself- buying it from the butcher. Top give myself some credit... we buy from a local butcher that sells locally grown meat. It costs more, but it makes me feel a little better.
I eat meat too. I also already stated multiple times that necessity is an exception, so subsistence hunters are not what I'm talking about (unless they are unscrupulous about it, and some are). This is really just me picking my battles and showing a specific interest in the subject of sport hunting (eating it doesn't make it much better for me, for many reasons that I've already mentioned). I do not agree with going into the wild and killing wild animals for fun (even when there is an attempt to justify the fun by eating the dead animal afterwards). I think that the wild that we've got left should be the animals' domain, not ours. We are the interlopers out there IMO, because of the way we have encroached upon, destroyed, manipulated, and taken for granted the nature in which these animals reside. If we'd always shown respect for the land and the animals and cared about natural balances, I wouldn't saying this. It's just not fucking fair, to put it in simple terms. I also simply think it's demented to get pleasure out of killing, which is what's involved for 95% of hunters.
I agree that there are horrible abuses happening in factory farms as well - of course that dismays me greatly. I think farmed animals should be treated like gold. But that hasn't been the topic at hand (I mean, this conversation started, obviously, because gun lovers tie their defense of lax gun regulations to their desire to hunt for sport). That is great that you buy locally grown meat (I'm assuming you're implying that that means the animals are treated humanely). I too do my best to eat my protein in a responsible way.
Outside of the statistic you present (95% of hunters get pleasure from killing the animals)... I won't argue with what you're saying here. I especially appreciate your sentiments regarding trophy hunters- it's sadistic.
We should probably get off the topic, but to give you some insight to my way of thinking (in the event you haven't already come to some conclusions)... I watched a clip on a bull fighter getting gored. He eventually died as a result of his injuries. I didn't care. The bull was being mutilated and jeered as a spectacle and in my mind... it was justice. I was glad the bull got the upper hand. I don't care if it's a 'cultural thing'. You're torturing a f**king animal for entertainment. Evolve already, man.
I am with you man! I don't know if It's twisted or not, but not only do i not care, but I feel quite happy when a bullfighter gets gored and I cheer for the bull. Serves the fucker right. Bull fighting is absolutely grotesque! I feel pretty glad when a douche bag in tbe running of the bulls gets gored too, actually. I can't even attend rodeos, and would certainly not go to an aquarium (with mammals in it) or a zoo. Using animals for spectacle is immoral IMO.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I don't have any issue with people collecting rifles of the simple or classic variety. If someone wants 10 shotguns and 10 hunting rifles so be it. Avid hunters (such as my father used to be) find various rifles suitable for various animals.
Hunting is getting bashed as well, but as much as I seem to be getting ignored... I'll risk repeating this: shooting your meat in the forest is much more humane than buying products from large stores that ultimately encourage factory farming where animals suffer immensely. Not only that... wild meat is much healthier for the consumer as well.
It's the type of weapon (assault rifles and handguns) and large capacity magazines that need restrictions.
And Scruffy... you were taking shots there, but I have found you to be a very moderate voice in this issue despite a clear passion or enjoyment level for guns. You are also very patient with people that have taken shots at you.
I'm numb from this event. Toss in Tom Petty and what a shitty shitty weekend.
Okay, but FTR, that is a blanket statement that doesn't apply to all meat, and also fails to acknowledge the relationship between humans and their impact on animal habitats.
(I concur about McGruff)
I might need some clarification to understand what you are getting at.
I would agree that there are gross examples of hunting, but I don't think I said hunting is without flaws. In this forum I started a thread on animal abuse (I can't remember exactly what it was) and cursed hunters shooting a grizzly bear in a grotesque manner. There's another thread on factory farms and those animals and their plight is far worse than that of the bear's. Sickening really.
I'm merely trying to state that many humans eat meat. I have a little more respect for the subsistence hunter that kills his own meat than I do for myself- buying it from the butcher. Top give myself some credit... we buy from a local butcher that sells locally grown meat. It costs more, but it makes me feel a little better.
I eat meat too. I also already stated multiple times that necessity is an exception, so subsistence hunters are not what I'm talking about (unless they are unscrupulous about it, and some are). This is really just me picking my battles and showing a specific interest in the subject of sport hunting (eating it doesn't make it much better for me, for many reasons that I've already mentioned). I do not agree with going into the wild and killing wild animals for fun (even when there is an attempt to justify the fun by eating the dead animal afterwards). I think that the wild that we've got left should be the animals' domain, not ours. We are the interlopers out there IMO, because of the way we have encroached upon, destroyed, manipulated, and taken for granted the nature in which these animals reside. If we'd always shown respect for the land and the animals and cared about natural balances, I wouldn't saying this. It's just not fucking fair, to put it in simple terms. I also simply think it's demented to get pleasure out of killing, which is what's involved for 95% of hunters.
I agree that there are horrible abuses happening in factory farms as well - of course that dismays me greatly. I think farmed animals should be treated like gold. But that hasn't been the topic at hand (I mean, this conversation started, obviously, because gun lovers tie their defense of lax gun regulations to their desire to hunt for sport). That is great that you buy locally grown meat (I'm assuming you're implying that that means the animals are treated humanely). I too do my best to eat my protein in a responsible way.
Outside of the statistic you present (95% of hunters get pleasure from killing the animals)... I won't argue with what you're saying here. I especially appreciate your sentiments regarding trophy hunters- it's sadistic.
We should probably get off the topic, but to give you some insight to my way of thinking (in the event you haven't already come to some conclusions)... I watched a clip on a bull fighter getting gored. He eventually died as a result of his injuries. I didn't care. The bull was being mutilated and jeered as a spectacle and in my mind... it was justice. I was glad the bull got the upper hand. I don't care if it's a 'cultural thing'. You're torturing a f**king animal for entertainment. Evolve already, man.
I lived in Spain way back in the day and decided to go to a bull fight. I think I walked out after a few minutes. That is one sport that should be illegal. On the flip side I did run with the bulls when I was in Pamplona... as I was sprinting for my life next to them I never realized how big those fuckers were! Those bull fighters can't be playing with a full deck of cards.
I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,761
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Rosanne Cash says that the “N.R.A. funds domestic terrorism.” I hope more activists join her.
So I fund domestic terrorism since I am a NRA member? That s a pretty assinine statement by rosanne cash.
Where is your evidence that the NRA "Funds domestic terrorism?" Come on..
McG was refuting the comment. And what Cash said is more analogy to the (only slightly) indirect affects the NRA has on domestic terrorism. Look at it this way-- does the NRA support gun controls, limiting how many guns a person can have, background checks, etc.? It's a pretty simple statement to understand, really.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Harvard researchers Daniel Hemenway and Matthew Miller examined 26 developed countries, and checked whether gun ownership correlated with murder rates. They found that "a highly significant positive correlation between total homicide rates and both proxies for gun availability." They also didn't find much evidence that a higher rate of gun murders led to lower rates of other kinds of murder (i.e., stabbings).
Again what law or laws can you pass tomorrow that will stop Crazy? I contend that no matter how many laws you put on the books, you take guns away from all law abiding gun owners who simply want to mind their own business. The Bad Guys by default don't obey the laws we have. You can't rely on the government to save you from everything. There is no legislation that can stop a Crazy guy if he is determined enough. If guns are not handy the crazies will find another means of killing. Look at the Boston bombers. They used those explosive backpack bombs full of nails and bolts. Should we ban the sale of nails and bolts from hardware stores cuz somebody might use it in a backpack bomb? I think a pressure cooker was involved too, so maybe we have to eliminate crock pots, no more roast beefs. If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night and you are totally unarmed. What do you do? Call 911 while hiding under the bed? Beg the violent Criminal for mercy while you are wanting for police to show up? When the police do show up, you then become a hostage. Or maybe consider educating yourself on how to operate a firearm. They have good firearm handling and safety courses just for that. Learn how to operate the one you have and be accurate with it, just have one and know how to use it just in case. Hopefully and more than likely you'll never need it. I think at some point people need to take responsibility for their immediate safety. But of course the Vegas-style shooting nobody could possibly be prepared for, where you have a guy up 30 floors shooting down on a crowd that's just insane. Most of this gun violence occurs in populated areas and gun free zones. Movie theaters, schools, night clubs. People who want to kill are by default cowards so they go to where they know they'll be Little Resistance and by the time the police got there they've already been shooting for a while unfortunately. Now if you go to a gun club where people pay money so they can shoot their rifles or do some skeet shooting, no gun violence happens at these places does it. Why not? Because everyone at a gun club is an armed, presumably law-abiding citizens. A person that wants to do a lot of killing isn't going to go someplace where he knows everybody is armed.
Post edited by RYME on
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,761
Again what law or laws can you pass tomorrow that will stop Crazy? I contend that no matter how many laws you put on the books, you take guns away from all law abiding gun owners who simply want to mind their own business. The Bad Guys by default don't obey the laws we have. You can't rely on the government to save you from everything. There is no legislation that can stop a Crazy guy if he is determined enough. If guns are not handy the crazies will find another means of killing. Look at the Boston bombers. They used those explosive backpack bombs full of nails and bolts. Should we ban the sale of nails and bolts from hardware stores cuz somebody might use it in a backpack bomb? I think a pressure cooker was involved too, so maybe we have to eliminate crock pots, no more roast beefs. If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night and you are totally unarmed. What do you do? Call 911 while hiding under the bed? Beg the violent Criminal for mercy while you are wanting for police to show up? When the police do show up, you then become a hostage. Or maybe consider educating yourself on how to operate a firearm. They have good firearm handling and safety courses just for that. Learn how to operate the one you have and be accurate with it, just have one and know how to use it just in case. Hopefully and more than likely you'll never need it. I think at some point people need to take responsibility for their immediate safety. But of course the Vegas-style shooting nobody could possibly be prepared for, where you have a guy up 30 floors shooting down on a crowd that's just insane. Most of this gun violence occurs in populated areas and gun free zones. Movie theaters, schools, night clubs. People who want to kill are by default cowards so they go to where they know they'll be Little Resistance and by the time the police got there they've already been shooting for a while unfortunately. Now if you go to a gun club where people pay money so they can shoot their rifles or do some skeet shooting, no gun violence happens at these places does it. Why not? Because everyone at a gun club is an armed, presumably law-abiding citizens. A person that wants to do a lot of killing isn't going to go someplace where he knows everybody is armed.
Nobody is even suggesting you can legislate against crazy. That's a rather weak argument, isn't it?
As far as the rest, your arguments quickly fall apart when looking at the stats.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Again what law or laws can you pass tomorrow that will stop Crazy? I contend that no matter how many laws you put on the books, you take guns away from all law abiding gun owners who simply want to mind their own business. The Bad Guys by default don't obey the laws we have. You can't rely on the government to save you from everything. There is no legislation that can stop a Crazy guy if he is determined enough. If guns are not handy the crazies will find another means of killing. Look at the Boston bombers. They used those explosive backpack bombs full of nails and bolts. Should we ban the sale of nails and bolts from hardware stores cuz somebody might use it in a backpack bomb? I think a pressure cooker was involved too, so maybe we have to eliminate crock pots, no more roast beefs. If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night and you are totally unarmed. What do you do? Call 911 while hiding under the bed? Beg the violent Criminal for mercy while you are wanting for police to show up? When the police do show up, you then become a hostage. Or maybe consider educating yourself on how to operate a firearm. They have good firearm handling and safety courses just for that. Learn how to operate the one you have and be accurate with it, just have one and know how to use it just in case. Hopefully and more than likely you'll never need it. I think at some point people need to take responsibility for their immediate safety. But of course the Vegas-style shooting nobody could possibly be prepared for, where you have a guy up 30 floors shooting down on a crowd that's just insane. Most of this gun violence occurs in populated areas and gun free zones. Movie theaters, schools, night clubs. People who want to kill are by default cowards so they go to where they know they'll be Little Resistance and by the time the police got there they've already been shooting for a while unfortunately. Now if you go to a gun club where people pay money so they can shoot their rifles or do some skeet shooting, no gun violence happens at these places does it. Why not? Because everyone at a gun club is an armed, presumably law-abiding citizens. A person that wants to do a lot of killing isn't going to go someplace where he knows everybody is armed.
Again what law or laws can you pass tomorrow that will stop Crazy? I contend that no matter how many laws you put on the books, you take guns away from all law abiding gun owners who simply want to mind their own business. The Bad Guys by default don't obey the laws we have. You can't rely on the government to save you from everything. There is no legislation that can stop a Crazy guy if he is determined enough. If guns are not handy the crazies will find another means of killing. Look at the Boston bombers. They used those explosive backpack bombs full of nails and bolts. Should we ban the sale of nails and bolts from hardware stores cuz somebody might use it in a backpack bomb? I think a pressure cooker was involved too, so maybe we have to eliminate crock pots, no more roast beefs. If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night and you are totally unarmed. What do you do? Call 911 while hiding under the bed? Beg the violent Criminal for mercy while you are wanting for police to show up? When the police do show up, you then become a hostage. Or maybe consider educating yourself on how to operate a firearm. They have good firearm handling and safety courses just for that. Learn how to operate the one you have and be accurate with it, just have one and know how to use it just in case. Hopefully and more than likely you'll never need it. I think at some point people need to take responsibility for their immediate safety. But of course the Vegas-style shooting nobody could possibly be prepared for, where you have a guy up 30 floors shooting down on a crowd that's just insane. Most of this gun violence occurs in populated areas and gun free zones. Movie theaters, schools, night clubs. People who want to kill are by default cowards so they go to where they know they'll be Little Resistance and by the time the police got there they've already been shooting for a while unfortunately. Now if you go to a gun club where people pay money so they can shoot their rifles or do some skeet shooting, no gun violence happens at these places does it. Why not? Because everyone at a gun club is an armed, presumably law-abiding citizens. A person that wants to do a lot of killing isn't going to go someplace where he knows everybody is armed.
^^^ What living in fear looks and feels like.
I don't live in fear but i am prepared for different situations and know the world can be quite nasty if conditions are right. I have a generator, I ve used it once. I have fire extinguishers, never been used. I'm cpr certified, never used that either. Firearms, used for hunting but thankfully never used to defend my family.
Nails and bolts have a purpose other than a pressure cooker bomb component. Guns only kill people. That is their purpose. Of course we would ban bolts and nails if their only use was to killl people.
Again what law or laws can you pass tomorrow that will stop Crazy? I contend that no matter how
Nobody is even suggesting you can legislate against crazy. That's a rather weak argument, isn't it?
As far as the rest, your arguments quickly fall apart when looking at the stats.
As do most gun control arguments, if anything in this 538 article is true...? This relates to “jumping the gun” on the legislation that many think would actually make a difference. What is your one fix for the situation? I want lives saved, I do not want feel good policies that everyone declares a big win and forgets about until the next mass murder, which is exactly what the Washington game is all about:
“Leah Libresco is a statistician and former newswriter at FiveThirtyEight, a data journalism site. She is the author of “Arriving at Amen.”
Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.
I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths.
When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.
As for silencers — they deserve that name only in movies, where they reduce gunfire to a soft puick puick. In real life, silencers limit hearing damage for shooters but don’t make gunfire dangerously quiet. An AR-15 with a silencer is about as loud as a jackhammer. Magazine limits were a little more promising, but a practiced shooter could still change magazines so fast as to make the limit meaningless.
As my co-workers and I kept looking at the data, it seemed less and less clear that one broad gun-control restriction could make a big difference. Two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States every year are suicides. Almost no proposed restriction would make it meaningfully harder for people with guns on hand to use them. I couldn't even answer my most desperate question: If I had a friend who had guns in his home and a history of suicide attempts, was there anything I could do that would help?
However, the next-largest set of gun deaths — 1 in 5 — were young men aged 15 to 34, killed in homicides. These men were most likely to die at the hands of other young men, often related to gang loyalties or other street violence. And the last notable group of similar deaths was the 1,700 women murdered per year, usually as the result of domestic violence. Far more people were killed in these ways than in mass-shooting incidents, but few of the popularly floated policies were tailored to serve them.
By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. Policies that often seem as if they were drafted by people who have encountered guns only as a figure in a briefing book or an image on the news.
Instead, I found the most hope in more narrowly tailored interventions. Potential suicide victims, women menaced by their abusive partners and kids swept up in street vendettas are all in danger from guns, but they each require different protections.
Play Video 1:54
Was the Las Vegas shooting the worst in U.S. history? It depends.
While the attack on the Las Vegas strip is the deadliest in modern American history, attacks in the 19th and 20th centuries had higher death tolls. (Victoria Walker/The Washington Post)
Older men, who make up the largest shareof gun suicides, need better access to people who could care for them and get them help. Women endangered by specific men need to be prioritized by police, who can enforce restraining orders prohibiting these men from buying and owning guns. Younger men at risk of violence need to be identified before they take a life or lose theirs and to be connected to mentors who can help them de-escalate conflicts.
Even the most data-driven practices, such as New Orleans’ plan to identify gang members for intervention based on previous arrests and weapons seizures, wind up more personal than most policies floated. The young men at risk can be identified by an algorithm, but they have to be disarmed one by one, personally — not en masse as though they were all interchangeable. A reduction in gun deaths is most likely to come from finding smaller chances for victories and expanding those solutions as much as possible. We save lives by focusing on a range of tactics to protect the different kinds of potential victims and reforming potential killers, not from sweeping bans focused on the guns themselves.”
Comments
I'm going to quote myself here because again, the guy bought 36 guns in a 12 month period and the NRA supports that right.
Let's not get into semantics about the meaning of "fund". A better word would be "supports".
Ok, gloves back on!! I have changed my mind after this and I do feel all automatic weapons should be illegal in the u.s. Along with bump fire stocks.
Hunting is getting bashed as well, but as much as I seem to be getting ignored... I'll risk repeating this: shooting your meat in the forest is much more humane than buying products from large stores that ultimately encourage factory farming where animals suffer immensely. Not only that... wild meat is much healthier for the consumer as well.
It's the type of weapon (assault rifles and handguns) and large capacity magazines that need restrictions.
And Scruffy... you were taking shots there, but I have found you to be a very moderate voice in this issue despite a clear passion or enjoyment level for guns. You are also very patient with people that have taken shots at you.
I'm numb from this event. Toss in Tom Petty and what a shitty shitty weekend.
(I concur about McGruff)
I might need some clarification to understand what you are getting at.
I would agree that there are gross examples of hunting, but I don't think I said hunting is without flaws. In this forum I started a thread on animal abuse (I can't remember exactly what it was) and cursed hunters shooting a grizzly bear in a grotesque manner. There's another thread on factory farms and those animals and their plight is far worse than that of the bear's. Sickening really.
I'm merely trying to state that many humans eat meat. I have a little more respect for the subsistence hunter that kills his own meat than I do for myself- buying it from the butcher. Top give myself some credit... we buy from a local butcher that sells locally grown meat. It costs more, but it makes me feel a little better.
I agree that there are horrible abuses happening in factory farms as well - of course that dismays me greatly. I think farmed animals should be treated like gold. But that hasn't been the topic at hand (I mean, this conversation started, obviously, because gun lovers tie their defense of lax gun regulations to their desire to hunt for sport). That is great that you buy locally grown meat (I'm assuming you're implying that that means the animals are treated humanely). I too do my best to eat my protein in a responsible way.
As it stands, I have to agree, in general, to Cash's statement.
Del and Allie, thanks for the compliment. Seventeen years of teaching 8th grade and having five kids gives you patience. lol
Outside of the statistic you present (95% of hunters get pleasure from killing the animals)... I won't argue with what you're saying here. I especially appreciate your sentiments regarding trophy hunters- it's sadistic.
We should probably get off the topic, but to give you some insight to my way of thinking (in the event you haven't already come to some conclusions)... I watched a clip on a bull fighter getting gored. He eventually died as a result of his injuries. I didn't care. The bull was being mutilated and jeered as a spectacle and in my mind... it was justice. I was glad the bull got the upper hand. I don't care if it's a 'cultural thing'. You're torturing a f**king animal for entertainment. Evolve already, man.
I can't even attend rodeos, and would certainly not go to an aquarium (with mammals in it) or a zoo. Using animals for spectacle is immoral IMO.
On the flip side I did run with the bulls when I was in Pamplona... as I was sprinting for my life next to them I never realized how big those fuckers were! Those bull fighters can't be playing with a full deck of cards.
Ferdinand.
Very peaceful until stung by a bee.
Yup.
As well... things aren't always what they seem to be.
Country Musicians, Stand Up to the NRA. (not my words)
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/03/opinion/rosanne-cash-country-musicians-nra.html
The Bad Guys by default don't obey the laws we have. You can't rely on the government to save you from everything.
There is no legislation that can stop a Crazy guy if he is determined enough.
If guns are not handy the crazies will find another means of killing. Look at the Boston bombers. They used those explosive backpack bombs full of nails and bolts. Should we ban the sale of nails and bolts from hardware stores cuz somebody might use it in a backpack bomb? I think a pressure cooker was involved too, so maybe we have to eliminate crock pots, no more roast beefs.
If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night and you are totally unarmed. What do you do?
Call 911 while hiding under the bed?
Beg the violent Criminal for mercy while you are wanting for police to show up? When the police do show up, you then become a hostage.
Or maybe consider educating yourself on how to operate a firearm. They have good firearm handling and safety courses just for that. Learn how to operate the one you have and be accurate with it, just have one and know how to use it just in case. Hopefully and more than likely you'll never need it.
I think at some point people need to take responsibility for their immediate safety.
But of course the Vegas-style shooting nobody could possibly be prepared for, where you have a guy up 30 floors shooting down on a crowd that's just insane.
Most of this gun violence occurs in populated areas and gun free zones. Movie theaters, schools, night clubs. People who want to kill are by default cowards so they go to where they know they'll be Little Resistance and by the time the police got there they've already been shooting for a while unfortunately.
Now if you go to a gun club where people pay money so they can shoot their rifles or do some skeet shooting, no gun violence happens at these places does it. Why not? Because everyone at a gun club is an armed, presumably law-abiding citizens. A person that wants to do a lot of killing isn't going to go someplace where he knows everybody is armed.
Nobody is even suggesting you can legislate against crazy. That's a rather weak argument, isn't it?
As far as the rest, your arguments quickly fall apart when looking at the stats.
Nice stats. Go Canada!
What living in fear looks and feels like.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story
“Leah Libresco is a statistician and former newswriter at FiveThirtyEight, a data journalism site. She is the author of “Arriving at Amen.”
Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.
I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths.
When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gun owner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, a rocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.
As for silencers — they deserve that name only in movies, where they reduce gunfire to a soft puick puick. In real life, silencers limit hearing damage for shooters but don’t make gunfire dangerously quiet. An AR-15 with a silencer is about as loud as a jackhammer. Magazine limits were a little more promising, but a practiced shooter could still change magazines so fast as to make the limit meaningless.
As my co-workers and I kept looking at the data, it seemed less and less clear that one broad gun-control restriction could make a big difference. Two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States every year are suicides. Almost no proposed restriction would make it meaningfully harder for people with guns on hand to use them. I couldn't even answer my most desperate question: If I had a friend who had guns in his home and a history of suicide attempts, was there anything I could do that would help?
However, the next-largest set of gun deaths — 1 in 5 — were young men aged 15 to 34, killed in homicides. These men were most likely to die at the hands of other young men, often related to gang loyalties or other street violence. And the last notable group of similar deaths was the 1,700 women murdered per year, usually as the result of domestic violence. Far more people were killed in these ways than in mass-shooting incidents, but few of the popularly floated policies were tailored to serve them.
By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. Policies that often seem as if they were drafted by people who have encountered guns only as a figure in a briefing book or an image on the news.
Instead, I found the most hope in more narrowly tailored interventions. Potential suicide victims, women menaced by their abusive partners and kids swept up in street vendettas are all in danger from guns, but they each require different protections.
Older men, who make up the largest shareof gun suicides, need better access to people who could care for them and get them help. Women endangered by specific men need to be prioritized by police, who can enforce restraining orders prohibiting these men from buying and owning guns. Younger men at risk of violence need to be identified before they take a life or lose theirs and to be connected to mentors who can help them de-escalate conflicts.
Even the most data-driven practices, such as New Orleans’ plan to identify gang members for intervention based on previous arrests and weapons seizures, wind up more personal than most policies floated. The young men at risk can be identified by an algorithm, but they have to be disarmed one by one, personally — not en masse as though they were all interchangeable. A reduction in gun deaths is most likely to come from finding smaller chances for victories and expanding those solutions as much as possible. We save lives by focusing on a range of tactics to protect the different kinds of potential victims and reforming potential killers, not from sweeping bans focused on the guns themselves.”