Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: We don't have a gun problem in this country
They do have attack related shootings in other countries. Just in the last 12 years Austrulia, Brazil, Canada, Finland, etc etc...
I couldn't find a handgun in 24 hours if my life depended on it. Well, unless I was willing to rob/assault/disarm a police officer to get one. I would have a really hard time gaining access to a long gun in that amount of time too. This is even if I intended to steal one, because the majority of people don't own guns of any sort. I'd have to travel six hours to find somebody I know who owns a gun. (Yes, seriously.)
There have also only been a handful of spree shootings ever in this country. It was the 23rd anniversary of the big one (14 female victims at the ?cole Polytechnique in Montreal) and I still heard people talking about it, even people who weren't born at the time, because it is actually one of the more recent ones. Evidently, the average person not owning guns hasn't caused any issues.
Did you guys see that there was coincidentally a school attack today in China? It was with a knife, though. Over 20 kids were injured, 0 killed.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/12/american-exceptionalism-the-shootings-will-go-on/266293/
We've had more than that in the past six months.
On the topic of legal vs illegal-
But it's from the lamestream left-wing liberal-agenda-promoting Washington Post, so take as you will, I guess.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/
Unfortunately gun control is not the real answer. In response to the previous posts about other western countries lacking the level of violence seen in this country. More than likely this is due to the fact that there are not many "free" countries around the world where it's citizens enjoy the freedoms that we do.
This horrifically sinister incident has turned my stomach. I do not believe there is a real way to stop this in our country unless we give up our constitutional rights.I for one do not believe that I should have to have my right to bear arms or any of my other constitutional rights infringed upon because of the act of another twisted individual. If this is the case, then we should have automobile controls to ensure that we do not have any mentally and/or physically impaired drivers. We also need to make sure that once a person has been involved in a motor vehicle crash or violated motor vehicle laws that they are tested, screened and scrutinized to make sure that they meet someones criteria to safely, couteously and conciously operate a motor vehicle.
One can look and see that the problem is the person, not the tool. Let's deal with the real issuse instead of allowing our elected officials to use this event to further their political agendas and continue to turn this country into the United Socialist States of America. Remember, our right to bear arms is a huge reason that our country is still somewhat free and it is the only safeguard against tyranny over us by our political leaders.
I once again want to offer my support to all of the families affected by this horrific act. I will be praying for God to bring all of you the solace and support needed in this time of need. God bless you all.
In other words, it's sad that five year olds were lined up and executed in a classroom, but it shouldn't mean that *I* have to give up anything to stop this from happening again. Because the right to be able to buy 15 handguns with extended clips in one visit is far more important that people's lives.
Where does the right of people to not get shot in movie theaters, malls, and classrooms come in to the discussion about these constitutional freedoms, exactly?
Also:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/right-to-own-handheld-device-that-shoots-deadly-me,30742/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=standard-post:headline:default
The 1700s called; they want their foreign policy back.
Are we seriously saying that it's a good thing that people in this country are more free to kill other people? Am I understanding that?
I did. how crazy is that. I seriously think we need to get security guards in every school in america
Another big problem right now....the way we (as a society, including-or especially-the media) glorifies this sick individual. We will read about him for days, study him, see his pictures, learn about his childhood, his family, his behavior. And, sadly, ever other sick and twisted individual out there will watch this, study this...long enough to be impressed in some way or another. I am thrilled he is deceased but I'd much prefer he had lived and faced a publicly viewed execution.
Whether legal or not...the addicts will get their hands on drugs, the alcoholics on alcohol, the evil on weapons...whether you or I or anyone else likes that or not. He shot his mother in the face, killed innocent lives; the majority of those, children. A sick, disturbed individual no matter how you slice it. Family members knew of his mental illness. He should've been institutionalized. No amount of gun control can stop such evil.
LexiLupin,
That is NOT what I am saying. According to our Constitution, we all have certain rights that are guaranteed to each individual as long as the exercise of those rights do not infringe upon anothers constitutional rights. The problem is not guns or any other inanimate object or material (cars, cigarettes, alchohol,drugs, etc.). As I stated before, if this was the case, then no one should own or drive a vehicle. More people are indesciminately killed by the improper use of vehicles than guns. I do not see any political or legislative actions to curtail automobile ownership. Do you? What I am saying is that it is good to live in a country where law abiding citizens are free to exercise all of their constitutional rights as outlined above. Let's deal with the people who choose to break the law or violate another individuals legal exercise of their constitutional rights. If you think that throwing out the baby with the bath water is the correct approach, then I urge you to carefully reconsider the ramifications of such a view. I have two children and I thank God that I have not had to face the horrific events that those parents, siblings and family members of the deceased are currently experiencing. If I really thought that more gun control would solve the problem, I would be the first to sign on the dotted line. I will also be praying for our leaders to have the discernment and wisdom needed to try and prevent future events such as this from occuring.
I think the Atlantic ocean, pacific ocean, the US military, and the actual causes of WWI and WWII have a little more to do with oour lack of invasion during the world wars than our civilian gun owners. I'm sure you've got an awesome shot, and don't take this the wrong way, but major military forces are not afraid of you.
Some criminals will always get guns, and that sucks. But It's not an all or none problem. Many, many, many, many lives can be saved without eradicating every last gun. I consider those lives saved an easy trade for making it harder to acquire a gun, legally or otherwise.
Many drugs are part of an addiction, guns aren't. it's a pretty different problem.
Gun laws aren't that strict. The NRA is one of the most successful lobbying groups in the US. So I don't know why you say gun control advocates have increased costs.
The thing we agree on is that limiting gun ownership is not sufficient to eliminate gun violence. We need to address socioeconomic causes by investing in our people rather than making them fend for themselves. So, if you're ready to pony up taxes that keep people fed, educated, and healthy, and endorse a society that creates opportunities for everyone, at all levels of society, then so am I.
CoffeeBeen,
I agree with you that our ocens, military and causes have a lot to do with the wars. Where I disagree, is that I believe historywill show you that an armed civilian population is much harder to deal with than a professional army. I ask only that you look at the problems that we have encountered in Afghanistan. The Russions learned the same hard lesson in their attempt to take Afghanistan.
I also agree that social, economic and cultural issues are issues that must be addressed as part of the solution. I would argue that these issues are the real problem. I disagree with those who think that we have a responsibility to support people who willingly do not try to help themselves. I am all for helping those who are not able to help themselves. However, I have a real issue with helping someone who finds it easier to live off of other peoples charity rather than ponying up and trying to help themselves. I believe that our country is the only country that offers the types of opportunity for someone to succeed or obtain their dreams. If this was not true then we would not be a nation of immigrants.
I would agree that many drugs are part of an addiction. However, addiction is a mental illness. The individual behind today's tragedy was mentally ill. Signs point to the Oregon shooter as having some sort of mental illness. Aurora shooter, Holmes, mentally ill. Columbine shooters...mentally ill; depressive, paranoia, psychopaths. Loughner (Giffords shooter), drug & alcohol abuser, schizophrenic.
As a sane, law abiding US citizen, I don't think my right to legally own and utilize a weapon (if the need should ever arise) should be jeopardized because these individuals are getting their hands on weapons. Perhaps we should look at such individuals a bit closer and bring back personal and family responsibility. The idea of feeding, educating and taking care of an entire society is a wonderful idea but, at some point, we need to realize, that there is NO fixing some people. And, those people, are best (for their safety as our own) locked away in an institution as they are nothing more than a danger to themselves, the rest of society or both.
CoffeeBeen,
I wanted to address the increased costs associated with gun control in a seperate post. Gun control increases cost by increasing the amount of paperwork and record keeping required to maintain the permiting process and/or licensing process.
I also agree that guns are not addictive like drugs. However, the eradication, management and enforcement of current drug laws have many parallels with gun management. The bottom line is it is a person who uses any tool (gun drugs, cars, computers, tools, etc.) in such a way that it kills, hurts or adversely affects another individual. These items to not operate autonimously.
Lsatly, I believe that you over stated my marksmanship abilities :_)
cantwait,
I agree with your remarks regarding the mental illness aspects. I have worked in such an institution. The folks that watch these individuals earn their keep!
There is no question about that. I have been dealing with a mentally ill family member for years. The destruction that some of these people can cause is unbelievable. And, what is so horrible is that it is so difficult to sometimes prove their illness will result in something so horrific. And, therefore, they are permitted to live as if they are healthy, stable individuals when, in reality, they are nothing more than a ticking time bomb. They have figured the system out, they know how and what it takes to manipulate their way out of everything. It is truly, truly frightening.
But it should be costly because it should be hard to obtain a gun. I note in your previous point that you had some animosity toward people who wanted something for nothing. Might I point out that this is a bit analogous? If we as Americans want the right to bear arms then we need to be willing to pay for it. And I'd rather pay for it in paperwork than fatalities.
I just think drugs are a different issue. Yes, there are some similarities because both can be contraband. But ultimately, there are too many issues regarding dependency, self-regarding harm versus other-regarding harm, and cyclical legal transgressions that I don't know if many lessons can be learned except that you will never completely eradicate something no matter how illegal it is (and I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise). If there is something else to be learned then I'm interested, but I just don't see it.
CoffeeBeen,
I am not sure if it is animosity, frustration or both. I believe that gun ownership, as a right should be preserved with as little government intervention as possible to ensure the safety of everyone. That being said, I believe that current gun laws in my state are stringent enough. I am required to wait 3 days before receiving my firearm after I make the purchase, I must pay a permiting fee and undergo a background check. I believe that this is sufficient management by the government.
I agree that we will never eradicate anything illegal. If someone wants something bad enough, they will find a way to obtain the item. I will say that I have thouroughly enjoyed this debate with you and others. I just wish that it would not be occuring in light of todays events. Have a Merry Christmas!
So, the only right that people in these countries lack is the right to have guns. And instead of the right to have guns, they have the right to send their children to school without worrying about whether they'll get shot that day, the right to go to the movies without thinking about "what if someone bursts in here with a gun right now?" and the right to go shopping without worrying about someone spraying the store with bullets.
Drugs are not firearms. People become chemically addicted to drugs. Doesn't happen with guns. Cocaine and heroin are pretty easy to produce - you can do it in the middle of a jungle without electricity. Guns are difficult and expensive to produce. You need a factory, parts, technology.
Every nation in Western Europe, plus Canada, has strongly restricted guns and every one of them has lower levels of gun violence than we do. There is no nation in Western Europe, or Canada, that has seen anywhere NEAR the number of mass shootings that we have. So I don't see why you think that restricting guns WOULDN'T result in fewer criminals getting their hands on guns, considering that this is exactly what has happened in all of the Western nations that have tried it.
I was watching Anderson Cooper on CNN, they made a point not to show the gunman's picture or say his name for that very reason. I hope other news outlets are doing/will do the same.
Also, I don't give a flying f?ck about the 2nd Amendment.
You say that we need to bring back personal and family responsibility, but then go on to say that there is no fixing people. So I don't really see a solution there. And sure, locking the sickos away is great, but what harm is that person going to do before we have a reason to lock him away? We can't preemtively lock crazy people away because we fear they will do something terrible, they have to do something terrible first. So, no solution there either.
Hmmmmmm, where to look next for that solution....
Maybe he put a knife to his mother's throat until she told him the combo?
I do hope other media outlets would take the same approach but I sincerely doubt that will happen.
We do need to bring back responsibility. Many of those (not all) who are mentally ill know there is an issue. Yet, they choose to do nothing. They will not help themselves nor accept help. We give, give, give and we get nowhere. For the families of these individuals, they need to push for assistance to do all that is necessary to protect themselves and others. Sadly, I know the struggle involved with that and it sucks and it can be incredibly draining. Most give up as it such an arduous process. However, if I fear than a mentally ill family member is a risk to him/herself or others, I should be able to take some sort of action easily...without having to deal with the red tape that is currently involved. Unfortunately, caging these people (as other countries have done) isn't something we can get away with. $hit...that sucks. It should simply be easier for people to take responsibility in order to protect themselves and others. And, people should want to take that responsibility.
And, let me add this to this mix...these damn parents allowing their 5 & 6-year-olds to be interviewed by local media regarding the shooting. I'm local to the area...local news is full of these parents shoving their babies in front of cameras to talk about their friends that were "covered with blood" - $hitty parents with NO sense of responsibility. Responsibility is taking your child home and comforting them...not whoring them out to the media.
My first point was simple...the majority of these horrific event have been committed by sick & twisted, mentally ill, evil individuals.
And, interesting...I don't give a flying f?ck that you don't give a flying f?ck about the 2nd Amendment.
Lol, the 2nd Amendment comment wasn't meant to be directed to you, it was just a thought I had at the moment I was typing.
I agree with you on the young kids being interviewed.
The problem is, many sick individuals do not show signs of harming others until it's too late. Or maybe those around them are in denial. Or maybe their family members are just as sick as they are. It's just not a solution to say that every sick person should be institutionalized. Some mentally ill people do absolutely no harm. We can't lock them away based on the chance that they might hurt someone. I mean, that's a pretty sickening thought in itself.
It'd be great I we could have more personal responsibility, but that would be a pretty difficult thing to enforce.