America's Gun Violence

Halifax2TheMax

mattsl1983 said:

It’s way to hard to follow every response that debates this or that. No, its not. Not if you want to debate a complicated issue like guns and gun control. That's just lazy.

Can we not agree on better background checks? Yes, but to what extent?

Statistically can we not agree that the ban didn’t change anything.  You can’t argue statistics. Read through these statistics. Please illustrate how the ban didn't change anything.

http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/234036/americas-gun-violence/p308 And

https://www.statista.com/chart/12943/is-it-time-to-bring-back-the-assault-weapons-ban/



Can you not agree that parading children out by pushing an ideology on them is wrong? Victims that witnessed a mass shooting, organizing and protesting for change is not, "pushing an ideology on them." They say 17 people they spent 180 days a year with get shot and killed. What ideology was pushed on them and by whom?

can we not agree that something needs to change? Yes

i guess I don’t understand this idea that if you aren’t for banning guns then you don’t care. There's the "banning guns" descriptor again. Its banning certain kinds of guns and accessories, not banning ALL guns, as well as returning previous restrictions on purchase and ownership and maybe adding additional restrictions, all open for debate.

Im all for this “common sense” reform, just what exactly is it? What do you think it could or should be?

See my responses in bold.

rgambs

Add practically every great rock star to that list, including Pearl Jam

It's cool to hate on teens when you get older, but if most of us are being honest, what mental power we gained in wisdom we lose in speed, creativity, elasticity, and sheer force of will.
Youth should be taken seriously.

Halifax2TheMax

mattsl1983 said:

oftenreading said:

mattsl1983 said:

It’s way to hard to follow every response that debates this or that.

Can we not agree on better background checks?

Statistically can we not agree that the ban didn’t change anything.  You can’t argue statistics. 

Can you not agree that parading children out by pushing an ideology on them is wrong?

can we not agree that something needs to change?

i guess I don’t understand this idea that if you aren’t for banning guns then you don’t care.

Im all for this “common sense” reform, just what exactly is it?

No, I for one am not going to agree to your false and misleading statements. “Parading children out by pushing an ideology on them” .... you think teens can’t think for themselves and decide whether they are interested in gun control or not? You think that gun control is by definition a false ideology? And finally, you think that the republicans and even the NRA don’t “parade children” when it suits them?

And also I disagree with your characterization that the ban achieved nothing. 

You are exactly the type of person that you can’t have a conversation  about gun control with.  Just read your response and put it in context with your reply.  You create a huge huh?  What? 

And yes, I firmly believe that at the age of 14 to almost mid to late 20’s, a person is so directly influenced by ideas they think that they think work, that they haven’t realized the different between reality and ideology.  And if you want to pretend that a 17 year old has it all figured out for themselves, then you are, well I’m not going to name call but yea...

It’s east to target laws, the infamous NRA.  These are all things that you, and this is a very important word, that “you” feel like you can control.  So I just say keep fighting your fight.  But eventually you will rub out of ideas that that you think you can control and the world will probably be worse off. 

I guess you don't know any 17 and 18 year olds or interact with them much? Or, you're afraid of them? The ones I know are smart, hardworking and very attuned to current events, particularly those that impact them directly and more so if they're female. They're bold, accepting and willing to do the heavy lifting that's required to make change. No different than all those 17 to 25 year olds that marched in the Civil Rights movement and against the Vietnam War. Do you have it all "figured out?" Does anyone? Regardless of age, life experience, etc.? Setting a pretty high bar, aren't you? These 14 to late 20 year olds are very much capable of thinking for themselves and when seeing something that's wrong, wanting to work for positive change. Hard to believe, I know. There's a reason there's a First Amendment, specifically, the right of the people to petition their government for redress of grievances and to peacefully assemble. And the First comes before the Second.

We've tried your way and we're worse off. The statistics bear it out.

Gern Blansten

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

As I opened the CT scan last week to read the next case, I was baffled. The history simply read “gunshot wound.” I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the nation for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury that I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ like the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, grey bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, with extensive bleeding. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

brianlux

mattsl1983 said:

brianlux said:

mattsl1983 said:

It’s way to hard to follow every response that debates this or that.

Can we not agree on better background checks?

Statistically can we not agree that the ban didn’t change anything.  You can’t argue statistics. 

Can you not agree that parading children out by pushing an ideology on them is wrong?

can we not agree that something needs to change?

i guess I don’t understand this idea that if you aren’t for banning guns then you don’t care.

Im all for this “common sense” reform, just what exactly is it?

I think almost, if not all, of us here agree on better background checks. (we match)

Ban on what?  (Not a match)

Parading children to push ideology.  What oftenreading said, everybody does it.  (Not a match)

Yes, something needs to change.  (we match)

"If you aren’t for banning guns    automatic weapons, then  you don’t care."  No, I don't think people that are against banning automatics weapons give a rat's ass.  (We sort of match because, yes, some gun owners do care.)

I'm for using common sense for just about everything except, under certain circumstances, soloing on a musical instrument,  and falling in love.  Who uses common sense when they fall in love?  (I don't know if we match)

So I guess I only scored about 50/50 here.  Could be worse.

Brianlux,

thats why you are awesome.  We can talk about guitars in one forum but disagree in another.

from your response is I threw out a couple of things. You threw out a couple of things as a response.

You out the tally at about 50/50.

if we could all step back, and really appreciate it.  The idea of starting around 50/50 on fundamental ideas that we agree to disagree with is amazing.  50/5 can be built on!  

Brianlux, we’ve disagreed here, agreed there, politics this, amps that; you are one of the reasons I do chime in here from time to time.  You are self honest and put it out there.  I hope you got Wrigley tickets, cause I’ve got your drinks and or food all night!

Thank you for kind words, matts!  This place has been good for me because at times, I know I've been stubborn, a little quick to anger and even at times a real a-hole.  But I realize none of those traits gains me anything (although stubbornness kept my old man running over 96 years so I might keep some of that trait in my back pocket, LOL).  I think it's OK for us to disagree as long as we realize we all want basically the same things- a good world to live in, a sense of security, meeting out basic needs, love- and work through our dialog so that maybe we can come up with some things that work for us all and for the well-being of the planet that sustains us.

No Wrigley tickets for me but it sounds like you're going so cheers and have a great time! 

CM189191

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

As I opened the CT scan last week to read the next case, I was baffled. The history simply read “gunshot wound.” I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the nation for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury that I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ like the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, grey bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, with extensive bleeding. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

Rather than relying on marksmanship, the AR-15 used rapid fire. The lightweight rifle maximized its kill rate by raking enemy soldiers with high-velocity rounds. As the original designers explained, the speed of the impact causes the bullet to tumble after it penetrates tissue, creating catastrophic injuries.

How an 'ugly,' unwanted weapon became the most popular rifle in America
https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/14/health/ar15-rifle-history-trnd/index.html

interesting read.  a gun that wasn't good enough for the military became popular because it was popular with mass murderers.

dignin

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

As I opened the CT scan last week to read the next case, I was baffled. The history simply read “gunshot wound.” I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the nation for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury that I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ like the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, grey bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, with extensive bleeding. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

That was a good informative read.

How could anyone rationally argue against it's conclusion.

unsung

dignin said:

unsung said:

tbergs said:

Hey unsung, here's one I'm surprised you haven't been ragging on. Student is providing fake information about scripted questions from CNN.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

https://www.local10.com/video/school-shooting-survivor-refused-to-ask-scripted-question-during-cnn-town-hall?__vfz=medium=sharebar

You posted basically the same video OP posted, minus CNN's response. Are you still feeling the impact of those Tide Pods?

No, as I previously stated, like many others, I have a firewall to deal with genius.

unsung

my2hands said:

unsung said:

tbergs said:

Hey unsung, here's one I'm surprised you haven't been ragging on. Student is providing fake information about scripted questions from CNN.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

So now we are back to not caring what the kids say?

Make up your minds.

You have no credibility here. Nobody gives a shit what you have to say. 

And yet you keep responding...

Yeah cool, I can go away and you can stand in a circle in your groups that just nod their heads in agreement.

Trust me, I prefer a good discussion, let me know if you ever are up for it.

We all have the same goals here, I hope to protect life, well at least this stage of life anyway.  We just have different ways of wanting to get those results.

Bentleyspop

Socialists and leftists and commies OH MY!!!  

At CPAC, NRA's Wayne LaPierre Warns Of 'Socialist Wave' In Wake Of Fla. Shooting

https://www.npr.org/2018/02/22/587911457/nra-leader-warns-conservatives-of-socialist-wave-in-wake-of-shooting

tempo_n_groove

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

As I opened the CT scan last week to read the next case, I was baffled. The history simply read “gunshot wound.” I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the nation for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury that I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ like the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, grey bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, with extensive bleeding. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

The deadliest bullet in the world is a .22 bullet.  When you see it up close it doesn't look like much but it's a killer.  Most people don't know or don't really care. 

Add .003 to that bullet and you have the .223 bullet.  The same bullet that is used in an AR-15.  Now everyone seems to care.

dignin

unsung said:

my2hands said:

unsung said:

tbergs said:

Hey unsung, here's one I'm surprised you haven't been ragging on. Student is providing fake information about scripted questions from CNN.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

So now we are back to not caring what the kids say?

Make up your minds.

You have no credibility here. Nobody gives a shit what you have to say. 

And yet you keep responding...

Yeah cool, I can go away and you can stand in a circle in your groups that just nod their heads in agreement.

Trust me, I prefer a good discussion, let me know if you ever are up for it.

We all have the same goals here, I hope to protect life, well at least this stage of life anyway.  We just have different ways of wanting to get those results.

Your idea of good discussion is to peddle easily debunked conspiracy theories, spread false memes and lie about child victims. You are not an honest contributor here.

dignin

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

As I opened the CT scan last week to read the next case, I was baffled. The history simply read “gunshot wound.” I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the nation for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury that I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ like the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, grey bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, with extensive bleeding. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

The deadliest bullet in the world is a .22 bullet.  When you see it up close it doesn't look like much but it's a killer.  Most people don't know or don't really care. 

Add .003 to that bullet and you have the .223 bullet.  The same bullet that is used in an AR-15.  Now everyone seems to care.

I don't understand your point and don't know what it has to do with the article. Can you explain?

Halifax2TheMax

dignin said:

unsung said:

my2hands said:

unsung said:

tbergs said:

Hey unsung, here's one I'm surprised you haven't been ragging on. Student is providing fake information about scripted questions from CNN.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

So now we are back to not caring what the kids say?

Make up your minds.

You have no credibility here. Nobody gives a shit what you have to say. 

And yet you keep responding...

Yeah cool, I can go away and you can stand in a circle in your groups that just nod their heads in agreement.

Trust me, I prefer a good discussion, let me know if you ever are up for it.

We all have the same goals here, I hope to protect life, well at least this stage of life anyway.  We just have different ways of wanting to get those results.

Your idea of good discussion is to peddle easily debunked conspiracy theories, spread false memes and lying about child victims. You are not an honest contributor here.

dignin said:

unsung said:

my2hands said:

unsung said:

tbergs said:

Hey unsung, here's one I'm surprised you haven't been ragging on. Student is providing fake information about scripted questions from CNN.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

So now we are back to not caring what the kids say?

Make up your minds.

You have no credibility here. Nobody gives a shit what you have to say. 

And yet you keep responding...

Yeah cool, I can go away and you can stand in a circle in your groups that just nod their heads in agreement.

Trust me, I prefer a good discussion, let me know if you ever are up for it.

We all have the same goals here, I hope to protect life, well at least this stage of life anyway.  We just have different ways of wanting to get those results.

Your idea of good discussion is to peddle easily debunked conspiracy theories, spread false memes and lying about child victims. You are not an honest contributor here.

And to ignore or deflect when engaged by an honest contributor.
 

tbergs

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

As I opened the CT scan last week to read the next case, I was baffled. The history simply read “gunshot wound.” I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the nation for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury that I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ like the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, grey bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, with extensive bleeding. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

The deadliest bullet in the world is a .22 bullet.  When you see it up close it doesn't look like much but it's a killer.  Most people don't know or don't really care. 

Add .003 to that bullet and you have the .223 bullet.  The same bullet that is used in an AR-15.  Now everyone seems to care.

You're missing the point. Do you think semi-auto rifles such as the AR15 should be owned by the public? Yes, a .22 handgun or long gun is deadly, but the argument here is for the gun and its magazine capacity. If an assault rifle fired .22 rounds it would still be something that should be banned. No one is saying stop selling .223 rounds.

rgambs

unsung said:

my2hands said:

unsung said:

tbergs said:

Hey unsung, here's one I'm surprised you haven't been ragging on. Student is providing fake information about scripted questions from CNN.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

So now we are back to not caring what the kids say?

Make up your minds.

You have no credibility here. Nobody gives a shit what you have to say. 

And yet you keep responding...

Yeah cool, I can go away and you can stand in a circle in your groups that just nod their heads in agreement.

Trust me, I prefer a good discussion, let me know if you ever are up for it.

We all have the same goals here, I hope to protect life, well at least this stage of life anyway.  We just have different ways of wanting to get those results.

Ha!  What a joke, you run from every debate you've ever started with a snide comment or bad Photoshop job.
You don't respond to any questions and you don't provide rebuttals, David Hogg would shred you to pieces on any topic.

riley540

@unsung

wven though I think some things you say are fairly extreme, ( as many people on the other side of the coin are ) I accept you on here. I think anyone that stays with in the rules of the board are welcome to chat. 

Pearl Jam is a private company and holds the right to remove him at any time. But they seem to have this thread for open discussion and free speech. We all welcome to chat here! 

Halifax2TheMax

Here's how sick our society has become regarding guns. Fuck Jesus.

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2018/02/21/church-ar-15-blessing-ceremony/

unsung

rgambs said:

unsung said:

my2hands said:

unsung said:

tbergs said:

Hey unsung, here's one I'm surprised you haven't been ragging on. Student is providing fake information about scripted questions from CNN.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

So now we are back to not caring what the kids say?

Make up your minds.

You have no credibility here. Nobody gives a shit what you have to say. 

And yet you keep responding...

Yeah cool, I can go away and you can stand in a circle in your groups that just nod their heads in agreement.

Trust me, I prefer a good discussion, let me know if you ever are up for it.

We all have the same goals here, I hope to protect life, well at least this stage of life anyway.  We just have different ways of wanting to get those results.

Ha!  What a joke, you run from every debate you've ever started with a snide comment or bad Photoshop job.
You don't respond to any questions and you don't provide rebuttals, David Hogg would shred you to pieces on any topic.

Would he be able to film prior to the incident? I hear he has a track record for doing so.  Hopefully he will remember his lines.

rgambs

unsung said:

rgambs said:

unsung said:

my2hands said:

unsung said:

tbergs said:

Hey unsung, here's one I'm surprised you haven't been ragging on. Student is providing fake information about scripted questions from CNN.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

So now we are back to not caring what the kids say?

Make up your minds.

You have no credibility here. Nobody gives a shit what you have to say. 

And yet you keep responding...

Yeah cool, I can go away and you can stand in a circle in your groups that just nod their heads in agreement.

Trust me, I prefer a good discussion, let me know if you ever are up for it.

We all have the same goals here, I hope to protect life, well at least this stage of life anyway.  We just have different ways of wanting to get those results.

Ha!  What a joke, you run from every debate you've ever started with a snide comment or bad Photoshop job.
You don't respond to any questions and you don't provide rebuttals, David Hogg would shred you to pieces on any topic.

Would he be able to film prior to the incident? I hear he has a track record for doing so.  Hopefully he will remember his lines.

Which flat earth blog or white supremacy forum did you hear that in?