Gun Control

[Ron Whitfield]

Re: Gun Control

I guess the rights of a few hunters to blast away at un-armed wildlife is worth more than the safety of our children.
This is a preposterous situation.

It's not about (way more than) a few hunters (whom don't use assault rifles for hunting, anyway), it's about preserving our Constitutional rights and being able to defend yourself against even heavily armed gunmen.

Chainsaw Massacre and Terrantino's bloodfest are the top grossers at the box office this week.

[matapule]

Re: Gun Control

Looks like there were consequences to that NY newspaper publishing a map of permit holders.

The newspaper did not put anyone at risk. Information about gun ownership is available to everyone through the Freedom of Information Act. If a convict wanted to know where the cop who put him away lives, that information is readily available to them. Besides, I thought you said that having a gun in the home would make you invulnerable and impregnable.

In fact, just the opposite has occurred! Gun nuts from cross the US have made death threats to the staff of the subject newspaper.

From the article:

Calls and e-mails grew so threatening that the paper’s president and publisher, Janet Hasson, hired armed guards to monitor the newspaper’s headquarters in White Plains and its bureau in West Nyack, N.Y. Personal information about editors and writers at the paper has been posted online, including their home addresses and information about where their children attended school; some reporters have received notes saying they would be shot on the way to their cars; bloggers have encouraged people to steal credit card information of Journal News employees; and two packages containing white powder have been sent to the newsroom and a third to a reporter’s home (all were tested by the police and proved to be harmless).

Let's see now, how many policemen in that area have received death threats as a result of the article?

The gun nuts want to hide anonymously behind the Second Amendment but yet want to corrupt the newspapers rights under the First Amendment. That would only make sense to a paranoid gun nut!

[matapule]

Re: Gun Control

it's about preserving our Constitutional rights

You mean the guys who wrote the Second Amendment could foresee the mass hysteria by mostly right wing paranoid gun nuts about 250 years ago? We have a militia that is referenced in the Second Amendment. It is called the US Armed Forces.

and being able to defend yourself against even heavily armed gunmen.

Who? What? When? Where? How often has this happened? Paranoid gun nut, I rest my case!

[MyopicJoe]

Re: Gun Control

The newspaper did not put anyone at risk. Information about gun ownership is available to everyone through the Freedom of Information Act.

What the newspaper did was make it convenient for the general public to find the information without the need, nor knowledge of how to, use a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) themselves. It also made the public aware that the information is accessible via a FOIA. Though not the best form, obscurity can be a form of security.

It's said that the map is safe because you can't search the information by name, but people who understand computers know that it's possible to extract the raw data. It may take an expert to do it, but there's enough smart people out there with questionable morals who would do it for the right price (or heck, just for bragging rights).

Besides, I thought you said that having a gun in the home would make you invulnerable and impregnable.

Nope, don't believe I've ever said that In fact, I go out of my way to remind gun owners, and people considering getting guns for self defense, that this isn't the case.

Perhaps you're automatically lumping me in with other people simply because I disagree with your opinions?

The gun nuts want to hide anonymously behind the Second Amendment but yet want to corrupt the newspapers rights under the First Amendment. That would only make sense to a paranoid gun nut!

One of the steps in training soldiers to kill people is the concept of "othering". The soldier is taught to see people who don't have the same ethnicity, religion, language, opinions, etc. as less than human. Once you do that, killing no longer feels like murder but rather "simply putting down" a diseased animal.

Calling someone a "nut" or "crazy" is dismissive. It's saying their thoughts, feelings, and opinions are not worth considering because they are less than human. It makes it easier to verbally abuse them, which is just another form of violence.

How ironic, using verbal violence to win a debate about physical violence. Or maybe, in the end it's further proof that violence does solve disagreements.

[matapule]

Re: Gun Control

It's said that the map is safe because you can't search the information by name, but people who understand computers know that it's possible to extract the raw data. It may take an expert to do it, but there's enough smart people out there with questionable morals who would do it for the right price (or heck, just for bragging rights).

You are equivocating. If the bad guys are smart enough to understand how to extract raw data from a computer, they are smart enough to figure out the FOIA!

Nope, don't believe I've ever said that In fact, I go out of my way to remind gun owners, and people considering getting guns for self defense, that this isn't the case.

Perhaps you're automatically lumping me in with other people simply because I disagree with your opinions?

Easy to do because you don't call out the gun nuts on this forum who say they need weapons for home protection. There is a post three up from here that is over the top paranoid home invasion, and you don't say anything. Yo are not being intellectually honest.

One of the steps in training soldiers to kill people is the concept of "othering". The soldier is taught to see people who don't have the same ethnicity, religion, language, opinions, etc. as less than human. Once you do that, killing no longer feels like murder but rather "simply putting down" a diseased animal.

I agree and you can say that about paranoid gun nuts too regarding anyone who isn't intimidated by their false bravado.

Calling someone a "nut" or "crazy" is dismissive. It's saying their thoughts, feelings, and opinions are not worth considering because they are less than human. It makes it easier to verbally abuse them, which is just another form of violence.

Putting your definition and spin on the situation does not make it true and is the height of arrogance. I am not going to dismiss the gun nuts because they are a threat to the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness to the majority of those living in the US.

How ironic, using verbal violence to win a debate about physical violence. Or maybe, in the end it's further proof that violence does solve disagreements.

You are attempting to spin into obfuscation. I put my lifetime nonviolent credentials out in the open and I will not be intimidated by your impertinent insinuations. What have you done to promote nonviolence?

You have refused to answer my question in the post above: Let's see now, how many policemen in that area have received death threats as a result of the article? Are you going to call out the gun nuts or not?

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Gun Control

Question: Were there guns in the home as you grew up?

My father had a rifle that he used for pheasant hunting once or twice a year; it had no trigger lock, nor was it in a cabinet, just in the back of the clothes closet. It wasn't stored loaded, but he had ammunition in a dresser. But we were all taught NO TOUCH, plain and simple. (Simpler times; nowadays, I'd be shocked to learn of such carelessness.)

My brother also had a BB pistol briefly, but he disliked shooting, so he got rid of it after about a year. I don't recall when my father got rid of his rifle, but I know it was before I turned ten, as it didn't come with us when we moved to another city.

[lensperson]

Re: Gun Control

The sheer amount of stockpiled munitions within the state means dis-arming is

not possible anytime soon.

As the ability of the devices degrades over time, a few owners may risk blowing

their hands (or worse) off.

[Kaonohi]

Re: Gun Control

Looks like there were consequences to that NY newspaper publishing a map of permit holders.

Too bad no one along the way (journalist, editor, county clerks, etc.) didn't say, "Hey, even though we can do this, should we do this? Let's slow things down and talk to some people."

From that Newsday Article:

Legis. Aron Wieder (D-Spring Valley) called the publication of the list "irresponsible journalism" and said he now fears for his safety because the map broadcast that he does not have a gun license. At the news conference Friday morning, he handed a $150 certified check and a completed pistol permit application to Rockland County Clerk Paul Piperato.
"I never owned a gun but now I have no choice," Wieder said. "I have been exposed as someone that has no gun. And I'll do anything, anything to protect my family."

Knee-jerk reactions often undermine the very things they are trying to support, creating the opposite effect. Obama and Pelosi promising new gun restrictions has gun stores selling out and creating waiting lists.

Real smart.

[Kaonohi]

Re: Gun Control

The newspaper did not put anyone at risk. (...)
Let's see now, how many policemen in that area have received death threats as a result of the article?

Oh right, newspapers don't kill people ... only guns kill people.

I can understand your rage, but it has clouded your judgement and intelligence.

Daily, police are being told by arrestees, "I know where you live." That's a veiled death threat.

As this is having the opposite effect than intended, certainly ranting about gun control is having the opposite effect.

Anti-gun nuts like you are just making things worse.

[matapule]

Re: Gun Control

Think about this! 85% of all children killed by gun violence are residents of the US.

Strict gun control now!

[MyopicJoe]

Re: Gun Control

Easy to do because you don't call out the gun nuts on this forum who say they need weapons for home protection.

You're absolutely correct that gun users need to shepherd each other. I started a gun self defense reality check thread a while back, where I point people towards a good self defense website which mainly advocates avoidance, de-escalation, and realizing how people unconsciously cause the danger they find themselves in. If someone jumps on that tread and says they need to carry a gun with them in the shower, I'll argue with them.

There is a post three up from here that is over the top paranoid home invasion, and you don't say anything.

You're right; I didn't say anything. Somehow your posts get more of my attention. Maybe I'm sensing more paranoia from you? Or maybe I can't resist all the exclamation points you use.

I put my lifetime nonviolent credentials out in the open and I will not be intimidated by your impertinent insinuations.

Please, by all means, lord your credentials over us. Show us how morally inferior we are. Let's see that self-righteousness in all its glory, because it's only been teasing us so far.

"Indeed, anger is the most seductive of the negative emotions; the self-righteous inner monologue that propels it along fills the mind with the most convincing arguments for venting rage. Unlike sadness, anger is energizing, even exhilarating." - Goleman, Daniel Emotional Intelligence

I just keep getting the sense that something deeper than guns and Sandy Hook is gnawing at you. Something personal. Maybe not even related to guns?

What have you done to promote nonviolence?

Nothing I can rub people's faces in.

[matapule]

Re: Gun Control

Maybe I'm sensing more paranoia from you? Or maybe I can't resist all the exclamation points you use.

Please, by all means, lord your credentials over us. Show us how morally inferior we are. Let's see that self-righteousness in all its glory, because it's only been teasing us so far.

"Indeed, anger is the most seductive of the negative emotions; the self-righteous inner monologue that propels it along fills the mind with the most convincing arguments for venting rage. Unlike sadness, anger is energizing, even exhilarating." - Goleman, Daniel Emotional Intelligence

I just keep getting the sense that something deeper than guns and Sandy Hook is gnawing at you. Something personal. Maybe not even related to guns?

Nothing I can rub people's faces in.

Now you are trolling.

[Walkoff Balk]

Re: Gun Control

http://now.msn.com/piers-morgan-deba...?ocid=ansnow11

Stop using yelling as a weapon.

[Kaonohi]

Re: Gun Control

Now you are trolling.

Actually he is just being honest. We know, however, that you value sensationalism over honesty. Consequently you start tossing out names, titles, accusations, etc., to CYA, and claim moral superiority. Go through this thread, and see that Matapule is doing all the trolling, by using more epithets and calling people names, more than all the other posters combined.

Myopic Joe is right on. He's also calm, rational and inquisitive. Why does that bother you so much that you accuse him of trolling?

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Gun Control

Myopic Joe is ... calm, rational and inquisitive.

I admire the fact that the majority of MJ's posts tend to be as you have described. However, I did sense a level of frustration creeping in that last post, with "more heated than usual for him" phrases like:

Maybe I'm sensing more paranoia from you? Or maybe I can't resist all the exclamation points you use.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please, by all means, lord your credentials over us. Show us how morally inferior we are. Let's see that self-righteousness in all its glory, because it's only been teasing us so far.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nothing I can rub people's faces in.

Let's all do our best to remember that this is one of the most heated topics of discussion our nation faces at present, and I admire matapule's undaunted passion; while he and I may take different tacks in our course, our paths and goals are similar (and, I suspect, similar to many others on this board).

The bottom line for me is that the increase in gun violence in the US has become unbearable, is directly attributable to the easier access to high-powered weaponry available here (and not in many other first-world nations), and can no longer be permitted to continue in this direction.

Matapule and I (and others) continue to see that there are people in our supposedly civilized nation that are not motivated to find a solution to the increases in slaughter of innocents, and are willing to cough up hoary old arguments about individual rights vs. our children's lives, arguments that were developed over 200 years ago and have long been negated by technological advances.