What will reduce Gun Violence in the U.S.?

[Sombeech]

I'd like to start a civil discussion in the wake of another school shooting. Sure some comical memes will be thrown around here and there with 1 line jabs, but what are some real solutions?

Less guns, zero guns?

More guns, better access to guns for defense?

Is there a certain policy you've heard or studied that would set us on the path to less shootings, namely mass shootings?

[Iceaxe]

The first thing that needs to happen is the laws surrounding HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) need to be amended. The HIPAA Privacy Rule prevents states and doctors from reporting certain information to local law enforcement and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The NICS helps to ensure that guns are not sold to those prohibited by law from having them, including felons, those convicted of domestic violence, and individuals involuntarily committed to a mental institution. However, the background check system is only as effective as the information that is available to it.

If you follow these mass shooting the guns are usually obtained illegally and are used by those forbidden from possessing them. New laws are useless until you can enforce the ones already on the books.

If you want to curtail gun violence lets start with the easy things first....

We have a broken mental health system that needs to be fixed.

We need a serious and meaningful solution that addresses crime in cities like Chicago.

:soapbox:

[nelsonccc]

The problem I have is what trust do you put in the government to enact new gun control legislation when the current laws aren't enforced or effective? I'm not opposed to smart gun control in some form if it will truly decrease the chances of a school getting shot up. I just don't know what that would be. It certainly isn't gun confiscation or an outright ban. Neither one of which I think would be effective or realistic.

Maybe closing the loop hole for long guns and gun shows, craigslist, backpage, etc. Though I'm not sure how that would work. I'm not totally opposed to a background check on all gun purchases and have personally met people in parking lots to sell and buy hunting rifles and such. I enjoy buying a rifle on line and having it shipped to my local FFL dealer and saving tax and a wad of cash. I know they run a background check then.

If that loophole is closed then technically it would be very difficult to obtain a firearm without a background check. If the background check is then linked to health records (like Shane mentioned above) it could keep crazies from getting guns. However if gun control doesn't work now, what guarantees that additional gun control will work? That hasn't been the case in cities like Chicago and DC.

I do think that "gun free zones" are a joke. A mass shooter will pick a weak, easy target, so why advertise that you're that kind of a target? As a recent CCW permit holder it is eye opening to realize how many people are carrying on a regular basis.

[nelsonccc]

Forgot to mention that I do feel that the media's treatment of mass shooter is part of the problem. I think if the media took a black out approach to the shooter then it would lose the allure of being famous to these shooters that seem for the most part to be socially inept.

[Sombeech]

I would like some solid answers on which proposed gun laws, existing or hypothetical, would produce ACTUAL results in stopping these events.

I've heard too many "but it's a start" excuses, we've had many many "starts", so what gun laws would "FINISH" these events, if any?

The Sandy Hook incident would not have been stopped by any law. No law would have stopped him. Is there any law that would have stopped the Oregon shooting?

[Iceaxe]

I would like some solid answers on which proposed gun laws, existing or hypothetical, would produce ACTUAL results in stopping these events.

I already gave you that info. The mentally ill are not allowed to have firearms. We need to stop them from obtaining them by revising HIPAA.

In both Sandy Hook and Colombine the shoots were already in the mental health system and should not have been allowed to purchase firearams. Several of the other shooters were also in the system, but those are the two I know of for certain. Because of HIPAA the shooters don't show up in the background check.

[Brian in SLC]

In both Sandy Hook and Colombine the shoots were already in the mental health system...

In the Sandy Hook case, wasn't the shooter using mom's guns?

Would you prevent an entire household to have firearms if one person in the family/home had a mental illness?

Wouldn't need to revise HIPAA...just let the insurance companies drop dime on them...ha ha... Seriously, though, if you've ever been prescribed any medicine for mental illness, and, you submitted an insurance claim...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/us/mother-of-oregon-gunman-wrote-of-keeping-firearms.html?_r=0

Hard to know where to draw the line...mild symptoms, ADHD, paranoa, people than rant online about the president (ha ha).

Registration would be a start, but, most of the firearms used in these latest mass killings were all purchased legally.

Re-instate the assault weapons ban? Ahh...too much material in the pipeline now.

Mandatory military service (which would include firearms training, presumably)?
Take 'em away?

Do what Australia did?

Bigger yet, how to shift the US away from being a gun culture?

[BruteForce]

An Armed society is a polite society.

Now, the mental background checks are all fine and well, until the government screws it up. I've already heard about legislation (not certain if in progress, or just discussion) about classifying some veterans or those under VA assistance as "at risk". Too easy for the government to flag a class of people as "insane" or at risk.

I think we start by hard-enforcing existing laws on the books before effecting more meaningless laws.

Then, we can start looking at technology. Biometric auth before a firearm is enabled, for example. That would reduce crimes resultant from stolen or "borrowed" firearms, but still allow legally owning wackos to murder.

[dougr]

The only solution is a decent populace. Children raised well. Moral standards taught and upheld. The old and now largely discarded principles of our society once again taught in schools.

[Sombeech]

In the Sandy Hook case, wasn't the shooter using mom's guns?

Would you prevent an entire household to have firearms if one person in the family/home had a mental illness?


This is a great point, if my son ends up having a mental illness, should my whole household now give up the right to defend themselves?

I think the stubborn fact is, no matter what laws exist, a mentally ill person can still find a way to steal, find, borrow, or even 3D print a gun. So the laws will never stop mentally ill folks completely from getting a gun.

So then what's the next step, knowing that it will always be possible for guns to be in the wrong hands? Is there something that the mentally stable can do, besides pass laws?

[Brian in SLC]

The only solution is a decent populace. Children raised well. Moral standards taught and upheld. The old and now largely discarded principles of our society once again taught in schools.

Being a "glass half full" guy...I think, by and large, our society is a decent populace. In the bell curve of our society, though, will be folks at either end. Those overly decent folks maybe are the ones that jump in front a bullet. The overly indecent are the ones pulling the trigger.

Always been that way.

What discarded principles do you think need to be taught in schools that would prevent mass shootings?

[Brian in SLC]

I think the stubborn fact is, no matter what laws exist, a mentally ill person can still find a way to steal, find, borrow, or even 3D print a gun. So the laws will never stop mentally ill folks completely from getting a gun.

Maybe not, but, having to steal a gun to commit a crime is a pretty big roadblock.

Nearly all the guns used in mass shootings were legally procured.

[Iceaxe]

I found this to be rather interesting.....

How They Got Their Guns
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?_r=0

[Rob L]

It is in the American psyche to own guns, to use guns, to shoot each other (there is no-one else to shoot). The "whichever" amendment is not relevant, because nothing will change. The problem is with that amendment in the first place, and that is old history now.

The rest of the world are generally amazed how you put up with these mass killings. It will not change, because of your nation's fanaticism with personal armament. The rest of the world (along with you living there) wait for the next one.

To be fair, the rest of the world has them too, but not quite so often.

But nothing will change, sadly.

[BruteForce]

@Rob L (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?u=17709). This isn't unique to America. In fact, I am coming to a personal conclusion that some of these events are staged by our government. Those tragic events that aren't are horrific to be sure, but its lunatics. As for
there is no-one else to shoot, I know many of us veterans would prefer a less restrictive ROE where we could unleash the beast in the middle east. ISIS would be WASWAS (bad, I know).

Technology can prevent many of these events for non-legally owning folks that just lose their minds!

[Rob L]

Well I'd disagree that they are being staged by your government.

Rob

[middlefork]

Technology may help with firearms purchased when it is present, but not much help for all the guns that are available to the public now.
Registration, Background checks ect. will not prevent anyone who wants to from getting a gun.

I would repeal the gun free zones. At least it might allow someone to slow things down.

[nelsonccc]

I found this to be rather interesting.....

How They Got Their Guns
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?_r=0

That is very interesting, especially to see just how much mental help was needed in a lot of those cases. Your idea of linking mental health records to the background check would have made it so that a lot of those guns would not have passed the background check. There were also a few instances where people got their guns simple due to poor record keeping and a timely response. That was eye opening and probably happens quite a bit.

[Iceaxe]

It is in the American psyche to own guns, to use guns, to shoot each other (there is no-one else to shoot). The "whichever" amendment is not relevant, because nothing will change. The problem is with that amendment in the first place, and that is old history now.

The rest of the world are generally amazed how you put up with these mass killings. It will not change, because of your nation's fanaticism with personal armament. The rest of the world (along with you living there) wait for the next one.

To be fair, the rest of the world has them too, but not quite so often.

But nothing will change, sadly.

A couple thoughts here Rob... Its not a gun culture in the US, it's more of a freedom culture. As a nation we tend not to totally trust any government, including our own. Or maybe to be more accurate we are suspicious of all government, including our own. Many of the citizens of this country think the rest of the world is crazy for trusting their government to always do the right thing.

82009

Protecting the Second Amendment is extremely important to many American's for several reasons. First off is you either support and believe in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights or you do not. You don't get to pick and choose the parts you support and those you don't. Giving up a right guaranteed to us in the second Amendment is a very slippery slope. If one right is taken from us it sets a precedent for taking the others. Also it's often said the 2nd Amendment is the Amendment that guarantees the others. There is provision in our Constitution for removing/changing/adding an Amendment but changing one of the original 10 amendments (The Bill of Rights) is pretty much seen as sacrilege.

Or maybe a simpler way to put it is freedom isn't free, it's always paid for in blood.

And to be totally fair.... most statistics on mass shootings in the world compare apples and oranges by not correcting for population, let’s get a chart that makes sense, shall we?

http://static.ijreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Screenshot-6_18_2015-9_43_12-PM.jpg





...And BOOM!!!

The United States falls from number one to number seven when correcting for population.


:soapbox:

[savanna3313]

Personally, I don't think it's a matter of gun control. If someone is hell bent on killing, they will do it with any means at their disposal. Daily we hear of suicide bombers who strap explosives to their bodies and wipe out dozens of people in one split second of time. Timothy McVeigh killed hundreds with one device in OK. I've read of several mass killings in China where the killer used a knife. It's not the instrument that is chosen to kill, it's the person who chooses to do such a horrendous thing. jmho I am someone who should be extremely anti-gun because my father was killed by his own brother with one. My parents did not keep a gun in the house because they were raising their 5 year old grandson and felt that "better safe than sorry". My father had no way to defend himself against his brother when he burst through the door and pulled a weapon. If my Dad had kept a gun, would things have been different? We'll never know, but he might have had a chance.

[Bootboy]

Some statistical perspective.



http://youtu.be/pELwCqz2JfE

[Sombeech]

The U.S. has "so many mass shootings compared to other nations" because the U.S. covers more land area than most of these other nations.

If the U.S. was split right down the middle, then the shooting in Oregon and the shooting in Sandy Hook would have happened in different nations.

The larger a nation is, the more that happens within it's borders. There will be more drunk driving incidents in the U.S. than England by a landslide, because England can fit within the borders of Utah alone. (but let's not suggest making alcohol illegal!) When a drunk commits a crime, let's blame the tool used in the crime and not the substance that lowered the inhibitions.

All statistics aside, if we could just start naming some policies that would keep the guns away from bad guys, I'm all ears.

Insanity is defined as trying the same thing and expecting different results. Continuing to write laws that restrict guns, dreaming of eliminating guns altogether, and not being more open to self defense tactics, is insane.

[Sombeech]

By the way, I'm curious what the blood test results were from the Oregon shooter. If there was THC in his blood, would we hear any calls for a second opinion on legalization of Marijuana?

[Iceaxe]

Below is the NRA's suggestions for improving our "gun problem".

Since 1966, the National Rifle Association has urged the federal government to address the problem of mental illness and violence. As we noted then, “the time is at hand to seek means by which society can identify, treat and temporarily isolate such individuals,” because “elimination of the instrument by which these crimes are committed cannot arrest the ravages of a psychotic murderer.”

More recently, the NRA has supported legislation to ensure that appropriate records of those who have been judged mentally incompetent or involuntarily committed to mental institutions be made available for use in firearms transfer background checks. The NRA will support any reasonable step to fix America’s broken mental health system without intruding on the constitutional rights of Americans.

[dougr]

The NRA will support any reasonable step to fix America’s broken mental health system without intruding on the constitutional rights of Americans.

Should society punish the innocent or the guilty? Require more from the doers or the takers? It's all the same question in every political debate.

[Rob L]

I hear the arguments that IceAxe et al suggest (and I'm sympathetic of Savannah's circumstances).

I'm from a foreign country, with (shall we say) stricter gun control laws here. There are guns here, both legal and illegal (hand guns were largely banned due to the massacres at Hungerford (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_massacre) and Dunblane (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre) (this latter one being at a school).



But there does seem to be some fascination with intended gun murderers in the USA to do it in schools. Or am I misled? Are there other un-reported mass-murders (like the Waco one) that the US press don't bother telling us about because it's un-news-worthy?

[dougr]

But there does seem to be some fascination with intended gun murderers in the USA to do it in schools. Or am I misled? Are there other un-reported mass-murders (like the Waco one) that the US press don't bother telling us about because it's un-news-worthy?

That's a good Q, are schools targeted more or not. But the media here, as in all Western countries, is virulently anti-gun, and school shootings are fodder for their agenda.

[Rob L]

The US media anti-gun? I'm not so sure, because the US media is made up of righteous US citizens who are, by and large, pro-gun.

After all, these shootings and the mass-hysteria give them something more interesting to report on than the usual cyclones, hurricanes and other death-creating mass-hysteria news-worthy items...

[Iceaxe]

Our US media is extremely anti-gun.

[dougr]

because the US media is made up of righteous US citizens who are, by and large, pro-gun.

In time you'll see that the media is composed of a small subset of the population. It's self selecting and overwhelming left. Like 95%. Googling campaign contribution data reveals a lot, as does listening to and reading the stories. The ethos of truth before agenda is long gone.

[Mtnseeker1]

There will be only one answer.
All this talk is just that my friends.
Put several citizens in any off these umm situations and the answer will always be the same.
That is by the way what gets us into the messes.
So may I suggest everyone take up arms because the days of taking junior out behind the wood shed are long gone.
And it is of my opinion that is how this all got started. Thanks to law makers and Cali****ians.....................I say let's start with lawyers . Scratch THAT LET'S START WITH SUWA .......................

[Sombeech]

Our US media is extremely anti-gun.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwEyBItsXkw

[oldno7]

Maybe the british are responsible for our infatuation with guns...

We defeated tyranny then--WITH GUNS!!!:roflol:

[caverdan]

..

[Rob L]

Maybe the british are responsible for our infatuation with guns...

We defeated tyranny then--WITH GUNS!!!:roflol:

I think the Spanish brought guns to the Americas. Now you are all Spanish. You just call it "Mexican".

[Brian in SLC]

We defeated tyranny then--WITH GUNS!!!:roflol:

And...where did those guns come from?

State militias. "A well regulated milita..." Where have I heard that phrase before?

That couldn't answer the mail long term, though. What did the standard continental soldier carry? French charleville muskets.

Which, pretty much bankrupt the French.

Founding fathers drafted the constitution...based on the idears of a French philosopher.

Interesting history...and, interesting context for the 2nd amendment.

[Iceaxe]

I'll just leave this here....

Sword-wielding man kills 2 in Swedish school attack
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/22/europe/sweden-sword-attack/

[Sombeech]

I'll just leave this here....

Sword-wielding man kills 2 in Swedish school attack
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/22/europe/sweden-sword-attack/

A sword was used out of protest because too many guns are out there

[Iceaxe]

Perhaps the article should have been titled "dumbass brings sword to gunfight".

[emoji2]

[Iceaxe]

Rob, tell me again how great a gun free Europe is working out for you?

Paris Attacks
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/world/paris-shooting/

On a personal level I never worry about being taken hostage or becoming a victim of a mass shooting as I'm always armed. I know.... some of you call that being paranoid, I just call it being prepared.

http://www.panama-guide.com/images/articles/20091130092045369_1.jpg

[Absolute Gravity]

Rob, tell me again how great a gun free Europe is working out for you?

Paris Attacks
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/world/paris-shooting/

On a personal level I never worry about being taken hostage or becoming a victim of a mass shooting as I'm always armed. I know.... some of you call that being paranoid, I just call it being prepared.



How does a gun stop bombs?

On a personal level I also never worry about being taken hostage or becoming a victim of a mass shooting and I'm never armed. Cholesterol far more likely to get me.

[Iceaxe]

"We were lying on the floor trying not to get hit. The terrorists shot at us for 10 to 15 minutes, it was a blood bath" is one direct comment from the concert.

Most of the death's were hostages. It's difficult to be a hostage when you can fight back.

Imagine being in a night club, being taken hostage, being led to slaughter, with few means to fight back effectively.

You might kick my ass in the end, but you had better bring five friends and a sack lunch because it's going to be a long day.

[Iceaxe]

Anyone remember this speech?

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/11/14/f267c56971735bc8acc651b1d367f5a6.jpg

[oldno7]

^^^^^

And---this has just begun.

[Iceaxe]

I'm afraid your right. The massive news coverage brings out the copycats looking for their 15 minutes of fame.

[oldno7]

so while un armed Europeans are on their knees, waiting to be beheaded, watching their wifes and children brutally raped, one would wonder, if those nasty 50% of Americans, who refuse to be victims, or budge on their 2nd amendment stance, enter the soon to be slaughtered's mind.
I could have saved my family, if only I had a means to defend them.....

This mantra will play out many times and likely in the US as well.

I refuse to give up liberty for the sake of feigned security.(or any security)

Everyone is responsible for their own security--no one else, especially government can procure it.

[oldno7]

As European's begin to be slaughtered en mass--an understanding of 50% of American's gun culture, will make more and more sense.

I believe Eastern European's are figuring this out much faster than their Western neighbors.

[oldno7]

being armed, anywhere does not guarantee survival, but it does offer a chance were one would not exist, without.

[Absolute Gravity]

If it bleeds it leads right?

http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread.php?74866-Violent-crime-in-U-S-still-declining&p=572568#post572568

You guys are the definition of fear.

[oldno7]

Being cognizant of potential for catastrophe in no way equates to fear, in fact, quite the opposite.

[Iceaxe]

Being cognizant of potential for catastrophe in no way equates to fear, in fact, quite the opposite.

^^^THIS^^^

82366

[oldno7]

Baghdad barack has this handled, along with herman--I mean kerry

[accadacca]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/11/16/f2b31a3ca9d3b960b4da1c2c4ba3b5fe.jpg

[Sombeech]

How does a gun stop bombs?

On a personal level I also never worry about being taken hostage or becoming a victim of a mass shooting and I'm never armed. Cholesterol far more likely to get me.

I admit, I haven't really read up on much involving the attacks in Paris. Call me cold hearted, but I guess I'm just not that interested right now. Maybe later, who knows.

But I'm curious, if there were bombs, did the "bombers" also carry guns? I assume they did, right? Why would they do that? Why carry guns when you've got bombs?

Then again I am prepared to be corrected, maybe nobody had guns, maybe it was just bombs.

[Iceaxe]

There were suicide bombers that killed people, but the majority of the deaths occurred at a concert where the killers entered with guns and began shooting the concert goers, there were few ways to escape, few places to hide and no practical way to put up a solid defense.... it was like shooting fish in a barrel.

[Iceaxe]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/11/16/f2b31a3ca9d3b960b4da1c2c4ba3b5fe.jpg


It might be next year, or it might be in 1000 years, but there will come a time when bullets are worth more than gold. Anyone that has ever studied history knows that every civilization eventually falls in a bloody and violent fashion.

[accadacca]

Couple news stories in my feed today:

Black Friday breaks record with 185K gun background checks (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/12/01/black-friday-breaks-record-185k-gun-background-checks/76624604/)

At least 14 dead, 144 more wounded in San Bernardino shooting, police chief says (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/12/02/officials-shooting-reported-calif-golf-course/76675776/)

http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/a81e674c0b45c973b5a5f3422a56024a05656c8a/c=162-0-1758-1200&r=x513&c=680x510/local/-/media/2015/12/02/USATODAY/USATODAY/635846670582312090-AFP-546926289.jpg

[Brian in SLC]

Anyone that has ever studied history knows that every civilization eventually falls in a bloody and violent fashion.

Geez, and here I thought that if we didn't study history we'd be doomed to repeat it.

Danged if you do, danged if you don't.

Sad day in San Berdoo. Just like mainstream Muslims bear the brunt of the terrorism in their ranks, ditto law abiding gun owners.

It'll become a matter of public safety sooner than later methinks. Ugh.

[accadacca]

I'm watching it live on CNN right now. They've got some suspects and a black SUV covered in bullet holes.

[Sombeech]

I'm watching it live on CNN right now. They've got some suspects and a black SUV covered in bullet holes.
http://cdn.hark.com/images/001/415/052/1415052/orv-bullet-holes-bullet-hole_clink_large.jpg

[Sombeech]

https://findingmontauk.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/goonies_orv.gif

[Iceaxe]

Geez, and here I thought that if we didn't study history we'd be doomed to repeat it.

Danged if you do, danged if you don't.

So do you really think our politicians/government are smart enough and bright enough to break a cycle that has never been broken?

:roflol:

Jesus... our government can't even balance the budget or stop illegals from entering the country.

One a different note.... Am I the only one that notices another soft target has been attacked in the center of a bastion of gun control? I assume the shooters missed the "no guns allowed" sign when they entered the hospital.

I guess we need more laws for criminals and terrorists to not give a shit about.

[oldno7]

couldn't possibly be terrorism, that wouldn't fit brian and baracks narrative.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/02/police-id-suspect-in-san-bernardino-massacre-as-syed-farook.html

[oldno7]

oh nooo's,

Farook’s father, who was not named, told the New York Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/suspect-involved-calif-massacre-identified-article-1.2453471) his son was Muslim and “very religious” Muslim, who would leave work to pray and then go back.

http://heavy.com/news/2015/12/syed-sayeed-farouk-farook-inland-regional-center-san-bernardino-shooting-suspect-gunman-name-identified-redlands-age-motive-photos-social-media-family-facebook-video-chase-shot-killed-dead/

[Iceaxe]

I hope the President speaks out on stricter gun control, maybe with an Arabic translator, to target the right audience.

[accadacca]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/03/f1559c26284a13bd41b7b910f0150000.jpg

[Iceaxe]

With regards to the latest California shooting I just have to say it's good to see a husband and wife doing things as a couple. My only question is does she also get 72 virgins or is it just him?

On the flip side of that do you suppose Obama did a little happy dance when he first heard of the active shooters? "YAY! Another chance to push gun control... Wait they are white guys right? Maybe driving a pickup truck with some NRA bumper stickers all over it? What? No, NO! Not Muslims!"

[dougr]

do you suppose Obama did a little happy dance when he first heard of the active shooters? "YAY! Another chance to push gun control... Wait they are white guys right? Maybe driving a pickup truck with some NRA bumper stickers all over it? What? No, NO! Not Muslims!"

No doubt exactly his response. Obama is a man of the left. He is allied with Islam not because he's necessarily a Muslim, but because he and Islam share a common enemy: Western civilization, classically liberal, rooted in Judeo-Christianity. Same for Hillary and other committed leftists.

[accadacca]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/03/038c8f114ff00ae8857bb6066bf2608d.jpg

[Brian in SLC]

No doubt exactly his response. Obama is a man of the left. He is allied with Islam not because he's necessarily a Muslim, but because he and Islam share a common enemy: Western civilization, classically liberal, rooted in Judeo-Christianity. Same for Hillary and other committed leftists.

Really? That sounds like crazy talk.

And the so-called conservatives? No religiosity card there?

I think you got it backwards.

My guess is conservatives in congress have sponsored way more bills to take away personal freedom than any other party...

And, all this disrespect for the highest elected official in the US...I find it fairly disgusting. With some of that hate speech and disrespect, who really is the terrorist?

Haters gonna hate...not a great path.

[Iceaxe]

And, all this disrespect for the highest elected official in the US...I find it fairly disgusting.

I was always taught that respect is earned and not given. Your mileage may vary.

As for massive giving/taking of personal freedom that would be the Patriot Act. I don't think the average Joe really understands the personal freedoms confiscated in that bit of emotionally inspired legislation.

[dougr]

Really? That sounds like crazy talk.

Agreed that my comment could be misinterpreted. That is, no, Obama and the left do not support violence and wanton murder as does radical Islam. But they are allied in their final goal: opposition to liberal, Western, Judeo-Christian Civ. Islam is an external threat, using violence and openly discussing wiping countries off the map. Leftism is an internal threat, taking form and morphing through control of education, the dominant media, and pop culture. It seeks to upend our way of life and the founding principles of the nation. "Fundamental transformation" indeed.

There is a reason the left is so unwilling to demand Islam confront its evil within. There is a reason the left will not even discuss or label that evil within. For to do so would be to pass judgement, to acknowledge that some value systems are superior to others. In the moral relativism of the left, that isn't allowed, and further, would be an acknowledgement of the superiority of Wester Civ, and American values in particular.

What are the American values the left fundamentally opposes? They're on our money: E Pluribus Unum, In God We Trust, and Liberty.

[Brian in SLC]

What are the American values the left fundamentally opposes? They're on our money: E Pluribus Unum, In God We Trust, and Liberty.

Out of many, one? I don't think the left opposes that. How so? The phrase applies to national rights versus the state's rights, yes? Isn't that the genesis of the origin of the phrase as the motto for the US? Plus, the phrase came from the intellectual elite of the time. Has it now been co-opted by "conservatives"? Too funny. Seems like it would be the other way around.

In God We Trust was only recently adopted in the 1950's I recall. I guess most folks don't have an issue with it, Teddy Roosevelt notwithstanding. Somewhat at odds with the first amendment.

Liberty? I think both sides of the isle have attacked personal liberty plenty. See Shane's comment on the Patriot Act for example. Etc etc.

If the left is successful on upending some of the principals like racism, xenophobia, sexism, cronyism, bigotry, well, then good on 'em. 'Cause the current trend from the right at the national level don't look so good on those fronts...

Back to the gun thing...and the OP...I don't know what the answer is. When you got a couple of whacko's (pick either the California or Colorado shootings) who have legal access to serious firepower...what can be done? Mandatory psyche exam for anyone owning an "assault rifle"? Depending on the questions posed, my bet is most rabid gun owners wouldn't pass. "Do you think the government is out to get you?" "Do you hate your president?" "Do you think the ammo shortage is a government conspiracy?" And so on.

I dunno. Maybe delusional people shouldn't own guns. Maybe religiously intolerant people shouldn't either.

Heck, I probably have more firepower than anyone on this thread. Shane included. Most "unregistered". Would I oppose having to do more to own them? If I thought it might curb the current nuttiness out there, maybe. But, how to you convince a bunch of angry zealots? Hard to even have an intelligent respectful conversation about it.

There isn't the political will in the US to take this on. At all. Saber rattling is about it. Folks gingerly testing the waters. So, I'm not worried about not having access to my little hobby. Although, prices do make me want to fire up the reloader...

[Iceaxe]

Heck, I probably have more firepower than anyone on this thread. Shane included.

I think it would matter what your intentions and objectives were. Assault weapons, semi-auto pistols and high capacity magazines are all fun and games until you want to get some serious work done.

Just as a frame of reference.... probably the most feared individual soldier on the battlefield is a sniper, which is little more than a guy with a scoped hunting rifle. And I have some serious optics and long range rifles. One of these days a couple of these nut jobs are going to figure out they can do a lot more damage from a distance and escape to do it again. Right now these shootings are all smash and grab copycat type events. But eventually one of the nut cases will learn you can reach out and touch someone from long distance and live to do it another day, and on that day will have some real issues.

[DiscGo]

My guess is conservatives in congress have sponsored way more bills to take away personal freedom than any other party...


Can you give some examples? I think of Liberals as having caused the bulk of our taxation (a huge tool to take away our freedom), wanting to curb freedom of speech (to avoid offending people), gun rights, freedom to choose soda sizes, determine how to run your own business, require you to purchase insurance, etc.

I can see how you may be on board with what the Liberals believe, but aside from a great job of marketing being pro-abortion, I don't really see how anyone could believe that Liberals would somehow be more in favor of freedom than Conservatives.

[Scott P]

Just as a frame of reference.... probably the most feared individual soldier on the battlefield is a sniper,

Having been in the military, I would say that soldiers fear minefields and IED's far more than any sniper. So, the individual who placed such would technically be the most feared, though perhaps it could be argued that it's the device rather than the soldier that is feared.

[Brian in SLC]

Can you give some examples? I think of Liberals as having caused the bulk of our taxation (a huge tool to take away our freedom), wanting to curb freedom of speech (to avoid offending people), gun rights, freedom to choose soda sizes, determine how to run your own business, require you to purchase insurance, etc.

I can see how you may be on board with what the Liberals believe, but aside from a great job of marketing being pro-abortion, I don't really see how anyone could believe that Liberals would somehow be more in favor of freedom than Conservatives.

Patriot Act?

DOMA?

Voodoo Economics?

Extending tax breaks that should have expired in 2013?

Bridge to Nowhere?

Student Loan Relief Act?

Campaign Finance Reform?

Disclose Act?

How many attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act? 50?

Debt ceiling?

Shutting down the government? Cost the taxpayers zillions...wasting time instead of doing their job.

Derivatives deregulation?

Clean water rules?

Defunding the futures trading commission?

Criminal Code Improvement Act of 2015?

Those crazy kids...

[Brian in SLC]

I think it would matter what your intentions and objectives were. Assault weapons, semi-auto pistols and high capacity magazines are all fun and games until you want to get some serious work done.

Just as a frame of reference.... probably the most feared individual soldier on the battlefield is a sniper, which is little more than a guy with a scoped hunting rifle. And I have some serious optics and long range rifles. One of these days a couple of these nut jobs are going to figure out they can do a lot more damage from a distance and escape to do it again. Right now these shootings are all smash and grab copycat type events. But eventually one of the nut cases will learn you can reach out and touch someone from long distance and live to do it another day, and on that day will have some real issues.

DC (Beltway)sniper kept folks terrorized on the east coast for a long while. Texas Tower (Charles Whitman). Oswald.

Still...nowhere near a guy with a rental van filled with fertilizer and diesel fuel...or airplanes loaded with fuel.

But, yeah, hard to stop a motivated psycho with a well sighted in deer rifle...

[dougr]

Off topic, be warned.


Out of many, one? I don't think the left opposes that. How so? The phrase applies to national rights versus the state's rights, yes? Isn't that the genesis of the origin of the phrase as the motto for the US?

No, the phrase refers to creating one culture from many cultures. Multi-culturalism is the opposite of this. Regardless of our position on the issue, we should be able to agree that the left supports multi-culturalism while the right does not. I personally would like a country to call home, where my culture lives on, where my grandparents would feel at home, and where my history is honored instead of washed out by numbers. I don't think wanting a home makes me xenophobic.



In God We Trust was only recently adopted in the 1950's I recall. I guess most folks don't have an issue with it,

Most, if not all, leftists do have a problem with this. If we historically acknowledge that this is the the God of Judeo-Christianity, then regardless of our position on the issue, we should be able to agree that the left holds a dim view of Christianity in general, and decidedly so in terms of its importance and relevance to the strength of our culture.


Liberty? I think both sides of the isle have attacked personal liberty plenty. See Shane's comment on the Patriot Act for example. Etc etc.

If we separate parties from this (the aisle, literally), there is no comparison. If you ask leftists generally about what motivates them (as I have done many times while walking precincts), the answer invariably boils down to this: "I believe government has a strong role to play." Regardless of our positions, we should be able to agree that government operates by coercion. "Do this or else go to jail or pay a fine." Simple. Rules, regulations, taxation, mandates, restrictions, payouts, welfare, programs... all of these are government control. Telling people what to do, how to behave, how to allocate, what to do to get a reward, etc. We can disagree on the effectiveness, but we can't disagree that the left's proclivity is to control while the right's is to let go. There are variations and sometimes role reversal, nothing in life is absolute. But it's a, what, 80-20 proposition? If we mention "deregulation of xyz," would it not be a right wing cause the preponderance of the time? If we mention "xyz control," would it not be a left wing cause the preponderance of the time?


If the left is successful on upending some of the principals like racism, xenophobia, sexism, cronyism, bigotry, well, then good on 'em. 'Cause the current trend from the right at the national level don't look so good on those fronts...

If you believe those adjectives apply to this country, that's sad. This was the finest country the world had ever seen. The left spent generations convincing us otherwise. There was no other way to power than to convince the most prosperous, most free, most generous, most decent people on the globe to forsake their form of government, loathe their history, and transform their culture than to lie about it. The lie being to compare the country to the ideal. No human is ideal. No credit given for the fact that human history is filled with evil and vile, where we were the exception that led the globe out of darkness, where no one compares and all fall short, and especially no credit given for the constant self-reflection and self-correction this country uniquely is capable of. We'll just have to disagree on this, save for cronyism. Because ironically, cronyism best succeeds where there is entrenched, centralized power. Decentralized power discourages it and makes it's inherent inefficiency a liability. And we should be able to agree that the left prefers central power in large government.

All that said, is it not fair to say the left does not fundamentally support the three main principles of the nation's founding? Maybe that's fine with some people, but it is a change.

[dougr]

I assume the shooters missed the "no guns allowed" sign when they entered the hospital.

The bastards even had high cap magazines. I can't believe it. Those are banned.

[dougr]

On topic as a separate post...



Back to the gun thing...and the OP...I don't know what the answer is. When you got a couple of whacko's (pick either the California or Colorado shootings) who have legal access to serious firepower...what can be done? Mandatory psyche exam for anyone owning an "assault rifle"? Depending on the questions posed, my bet is most rabid gun owners wouldn't pass. "Do you think the government is out to get you?" "Do you hate your president?" "Do you think the ammo shortage is a government conspiracy?" And so on.


The only answer is to have better people. I'd ask, why are we importing people with known hostility to our culture? Why are we no longer a culture of uplift and decency? The problem is so deep.


Would I oppose having to do more to own them? If I thought it might curb the current nuttiness out there, maybe.

But how would that have stopped these people? Or any first time offender. I would bet most mass killings aren't done by career criminals. Anyone with a clear history who could buy would march along and buy and do a big first event.


But, how to you convince a bunch of angry zealots? Hard to even have an intelligent respectful conversation about it.

Why are pro-2AM people zealots when we hear Obama and Clinton immediately propose gun control at the drop of a hat? Obama explicitly cited Australia as a model a few months ago. Aus enacted a confiscation and destruction ban on weapons a decade or so ago. Feinstein explicitly stated she'd like a total ban and confiscation. It isn't fantasy, we know what the left wants. That breeds a rabid defense of a right, understandably.


There isn't the political will in the US to take this on. At all. Saber rattling is about it. Folks gingerly testing the waters. So, I'm not worried about not having access to my little hobby. Although, prices do make me want to fire up the reloader...

I don't think your verbiage is correct, and it plays to the left's narrative and control of the language. Not having the "political will" implies that something right could be done. No, it's wrong to punish all gun owners for the deeds of the criminals. Proper language should be, "There is sufficient respect for individual rights in Congress to not impose restrictions." I won't play into the left's game.

Besides all that, the premise of the discussion is that we have a gun problem. We don't. Statistically, we have lower gun crime rates than several Euro countries, and we have vastly more crime deterring uses of guns than crime committing. It's like banning all cars because 98% of crime involves cars getting to and from and escaping-- it just conveniently ignores the proper use of cars.

[oldno7]

.,.,.

[Scott P]

Statistically, we have lower gun crime rates than several Euro countries

This is an argument for or against gun control, but which ones? The above statement isn't accurate. We have lower gun crime rates than Latin America and much of Africa (sometimes much lower), but not lower that Europe.


I'd ask, why are we importing people with known hostility to our culture?

If you mean the Syrian refugees, then I have mixed feelings on the issue. I would agree with you if the US if hadn't been largely responsible for the civil war in Syria, which was a spill over from the civil war in Iraq. That makes the issue trickier from a moral standpoint. Although I believe that most refugees aren't terrorists and want to escape the violence, it would be difficult to tell which ones aren't. I definitely think that letting thousands of refugees onto US soil is going to increase the risk of terrorism. On the other hand, much of the reason for the destabilization in the region was the us lead invasion of Iraq. If we're going to destabilize a region and especially one where those who attacked us weren't from the country we invaded, do we have a moral responsibility to help the ones who where harmed indirectly by our actions? It's a tough moral issue.

That's why I believe that the US should only protect or arm those who share our own values. The US has a long history of arming brutal dictatorships and terrorists groups just because they are the enemy of our enemy. Reagan was probably the biggest offender in this regard, but many others are guilty on both ends of the political spectrum. It started a long time and continues to this day. Apparently the lessons still haven't been learned because we are still arming the Syrian rebels to overthrow Assad. Assad may be a brutal dictator, but he has never attacked the US and isn't threatening to and that's not true of some of the opposition that we are currently arming. We are simply arming our future enemies.

[oldno7]

Just doesn't fit the narrative.

But at least zero has the JV team on the run.....

[oldno7]

Simple case of workplace violence, now move along and try to restrict some other inalienable right..


Serious question, though---does wine and liquor cause drunk driving..

[oldno7]

well, at least this administration is able to prove it is capable of vetting refugees.


http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/how-the-suspect-entered-the-country-k-1-fiance-visa





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJQUkA1MrSI

[oldno7]

,.,.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsUJ2wu0iX4

[qedcook]

The above statement isn't accurate. We have lower gun crime rates than Latin America and much of Africa (sometimes much lower), but not lower that Europe.

Supposedly, we do have lower gun crime rates than most of Europe, population adjusted.

"In just 2015, France suffered more casualties – killings and injuries – from mass public shootings than the U.S. has suffered during Obama’s entire presidency (508 to 424). This number includes the San Bernandino massacre on Wednesday."

Other stats here:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/12/03/facts-shoot-holes-in-obamas-claim-that-us-is-only-host-to-mass-killings.html

[Brian in SLC]

Simple case of workplace violence, now move along and try to restrict some other inalienable right..

Serious question, though---does wine and liquor cause drunk driving..

Wasn't so simple...with that much extensive planning...ugh...

People ingesting too much wine, liquor, beer, NyQuil...who then drive cause drunk driving. That's why you have to show ID to purchase alcohol, and, its a requirement to have a valid ID on you if you go to a bar, etc. And then there's the "Zion curtain".... Folks still drink and drive. But, there's roadside checks including roadblocks. And, I've done the hokey pokey on the side of the road a few times (always passed).

Its tough in Utah, though, because you don't have to be above the legal limit (.08) to be ticketed for being "impaired". Some folks could lose their jobs for being "impaired" and its a judgement call from the officer.

Look how much effort we expend on alcohol in the US, and how little we spend on firearms...given the toll they cause. And, I'm not talking about just restricting use of either, but, education. We used to get pretty good education on firearms when I was a kid at least (hunter's safety, etc). Seems like not so much these days.

Give a liberal a gun, shoot for the day. Teach a liberal too shoot, shoot for a lifetime. Take a liberal shooting! Ha ha.

Can you imagine, applying the "Zion curtain" mentality to guns? Pretty funny.

[Brian in SLC]

The only answer is to have better people. I'd ask, why are we importing people with known hostility to our culture? Why are we no longer a culture of uplift and decency? The problem is so deep.

We aren't. Refugees aren't hostile to the U.S. We had this discussion at work recently...kinda interesting. Me (homegrown Montana boy), co-worker originally from Laos (refugee Hmong), co-worker originally from Germany, co-worker originally from Bosnia (refugee) and co-worker from Brazil. You can bet all of us love America, but, I never had to prove it, since I was born here. Amazing diversity here and part of what makes this the best country on the planet. American dream, opportunity, respect. I see the US as a culture of uplift and decency everyday, especially among the folks I work with. Every day. Nearly every minute.

If you fill your head with hate, then, that's what you see. Which wolf do you feed?


But how would that have stopped these people? Or any first time offender. I would bet most mass killings aren't done by career criminals. Anyone with a clear history who could buy would march along and buy and do a big first event.

What if it was more difficult to own and maintain an assault rifle? Its obviously not now. And, law of supply and demand, look how cheap and available they are compared to a few years ago. Prices have really dropped and the stores are stacked to the gills with them. Ammo too.


Why are pro-2AM people zealots when we hear Obama and Clinton immediately propose gun control at the drop of a hat?

That hat's been dropping a bunch more lately. They keep talking about it, but, when was the last time a bill was introduced into congress that went anywhere, with regard to any change in national gun laws? Just ain't happening.



I don't think your verbiage is correct, and it plays to the left's narrative and control of the language. Not having the "political will" implies that something right could be done. No, it's wrong to punish all gun owners for the deeds of the criminals. Proper language should be, "There is sufficient respect for individual rights in Congress to not impose restrictions." I won't play into the left's game.

And I think "punish" isn't the correct verbiage for gun owners. We are privileged to be able to own hi cap mags and assault weapons, gobs of them, despite the first three words of our 2AM. Yeah, its a privilege. And, we'll lose it if something's not done to curb all this senseless killing.


Besides all that, the premise of the discussion is that we have a gun problem. We don't. Statistically, we have lower gun crime rates than several Euro countries.

We have a huge gun problem and gun culture who's genie ain't going back in the bottle any time soon. Way higher homicide rates than any country in Europe. US is 3.55 per 100,000. Compare that to any country you want in Europe. Switzerland is .23. France is .22. Even Canada is only .51. Venezuela, Honduras, Nicaragua...way higher than the U.S.

We seem to like solving our own problems, and, protecting ourselves rather than letting the government or whoever do it for us. Bully for us. But, you'll get the guy running a kid down with a 12 gauge and having a gun battle in the middle of the street too. We're quick to stick a gun into someone's face. Knock that battery off my shoulder. Dare ya. Wild west. We reap what we sow.

[oldno7]

And I think "punish" isn't the correct verbiage for gun owners. We are privileged to be able to own hi cap mags and assault weapons, gobs of them, despite the first three words of our 2AM. Yeah, its a privilege. And, we'll lose it if something's not done to curb all this senseless killing.




.

Do you even "Bill of RIGHTS"

I don't see "Bill of privilege" (enlighten me)

Do you understand unalienable rights?(born with them, not given by any entity)

The Bill of Rights is not a privilege, it is a Right, born from blood.

Everyone complains that the US isn't like other countries---hurray is all I can say.....

Privileges can easily be revoked--Rights, not so much...(at least not without serious resistance)

[oldno7]

I'll stick with this guys viewpoint, I think it is growing exponentially, as is his backing.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2015/12/03/exclusive-ted-cruz-reacts-san-bernardino-now-ever-americans-must-armed/

[Scott P]

Supposedly, we do have lower gun crime rates than most of Europe, population adjusted.

No. The US has a higher gun rate than all of the European countries. The one that comes closest is Montenegro, though when most people think of Europe they are thinking more of Western Europe. In that case, the closest would be Finland, which has a gun crime rate of about 1/3 that of the US.


In just 2015, France suffered more casualties – killings and injuries – from mass public shootings than the U.S. has suffered during Obama’s entire presidency (508 to 424). This number includes the San Bernandino massacre on Wednesday.

This is actual accurate. But it doesn't say that France has had more gun murders/injuries than the US; it says that France suffered more casualties – killings and injuries – from mass public shootings, which is correct. All gun crimes are not mass shootings, especially in the US. By far most murders and injuries by gun (or any other means) are from a single person being shot, not mass shootings.

So France has more people killed from mass shootings this year (Finland and Norway have also had a higher rate in recent years). They have however, still had less gun murders by a long shot.

(PS, again I point out that this is not meant to be an argument for or against gun control. Also, it is not meant to say that I'd prefer to live in Europe rather than the USA. In fact, although I like to travel, I mostly avoid Europe for various reasons). It is only meant to point out the error in the claim made earlier in the thread.

[Brian in SLC]

Do you even "Bill of RIGHTS"

I don't see "Bill of privilege" (enlighten me)

Some people need to be "well regulated". Perhaps you?

[Brian in SLC]

DC v Heller, " "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose".

Root cause? Have people become so afraid that they've lost the ability to be decent human beings?

Certainly all this blood-shed bravado rhetoric fans the fires of fear.

[Iceaxe]

Certainly all this blood-shed bravado rhetoric fans the fires of fear.

It's the media fanning the fires of fear. Statically there has never been a safer time in American history. Violent crimes/assaults/homicides etc are down 50% from 20 years ago.

[Brian in SLC]

It's the media fanning the fires of fear. Statically there has never been a safer time in American history. Violent crimes/assaults/homicides etc are down 50% from 20 years ago.

Concur!

But...there's the media, then there's the media. Some media seems to fill people with hate and fear all day long...

Crazy times.

[oldno7]

DC v Heller, " "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose".

Root cause? Have people become so afraid that they've lost the ability to be decent human beings?

Certainly all this blood-shed bravado rhetoric fans the fires of fear.

I guess I don't know any afraid gun owners, all I know,seem quite competent and relaxed.

The most decent human beings I know own guns--coincidence? your call...

I guess I don't know people who are afraid--lots who are prepared--none afraid.

prepared means for disaster, you'll have to interject the hyperbole.

[oldno7]

look up the fbi stats that Shane is referencing, those are real numbers, the rest is media/liberal sensationalism.

If you do facts......

If you want to be the safest country on this globe--simply eliminate the stats of cities run by democrats.

It's that easy...

[oldno7]

If you want to eliminate mass shootings--ban democrats from owning guns--it's that easy, including the last act of terror.

[Brian in SLC]

If you want to eliminate mass shootings--ban democrats from owning guns--it's that easy, including the last act of terror.

There might not be any atheists in the foxholes, but, when was the last time an angry psycho atheist committed mass murder?

Believe in God? No guns for you.

Worlds problems solved. You're welcome!

[oldno7]

There might not be any atheists in the foxholes, but, when was the last time an angry psycho atheist committed mass murder?

Believe in God? No guns for you.

Worlds problems solved. You're welcome!


See--thats where your myth doesn't gain any traction,

The folks who carry out mass murders--despite yours and others rhetoric,(which is all it is)

Are not angry, white,Christian, rednecks with jacked up trucks and NRA bumper stickers, it's just not(I know your waiting and hoping)

It's generally previously diagnosed mental patients, that slip through the cracks.

And you know how we all know they are mental patients---they vote democrat.:roflol:

Seriously--they have all been liberal democrats....

Cruz 2016:2thumbs:

[Bootboy]

There might not be any atheists in the foxholes, but, when was the last time an angry psycho atheist committed mass murder?

Believe in God? No guns for you.

Worlds problems solved. You're welcome!

Need I point out that the mass murderers with the highest body counts were godless communist dictators...

[DiscGo]

@"Brian in SLC (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?432-Brian-in-SLC) "


I don't really see how anyone could believe that Liberals would somehow be more in favor of freedom than Conservatives.
.

Please note that I didn't say, I don't see what's not to like about Republicans. I said "I don't really see how anyone could believe that Liberals would somehow be more in favor of freedom than Conservatives"



Extending tax breaks that should have expired in 2013?
.

Taxation revokes a certain level of Freedom, how can you say that a tax break is anti-Freedom?



Bridge to Nowhere?

What freedom could the “Bridge to Nowhere” possible take away?



Student Loan Relief Act?


What does this have to do with Freedom?



Campaign Finance Reform?


You mean the “McCain – Feingold Act”? Who do you believe the Feingold is of the Feingold Act?
Not to mention the fact that McCain is a Republican but by no means is he a “Conservative”



Disclose Act?


You mean the bill sponsored by Democrats about taking Freedom away from business owner, operators, and contractors to contribute to politicians without making public declaration of said donation?
I can see how you'd be in favor, but I don't see how more regulations would make us a freer society.



How many attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act? 50?


You may be in favor of the Affordable Care Act, but I don’t see how you can argue that forcing someone to purchase something they may not want, and removing their ability to choose what type of healthcare plan they purchase somehow makes you “more free”.



Debt ceiling? Shutting down the government? Cost the taxpayers zillions...wasting time instead of doing their job.


The Democrats have passed 1 budget in the last 7 years and you blame the Conservatives? Our Government is setup to “shutdown” when we are out of money, but our current politicians play political games and accuse attempts of being fiscally responsible of hating children and the Elderly.





Derivatives deregulation?


You may be in favor of regulations, but the very definition of regulate is to control. Freedom pretty much the opposite of being controlled.

That said, part of the problem we have now is Crony capitalism. Most conservatives believe that in order for us to be truly free, we must be free to fail. So we are not in favor of Government bailouts, regulations, or even requirements to be licensed by the Government.

My belief in freedom is so strong, that I believe that if a person wants to visit a witch doctor, instead of a licensed physician they should be able to do so. But just to prove that I am not crazy, I would not visit a witch doctor but instead someone who has passed Medical School and is experienced. I just believe that other people should be able to do pretty much whatever they want, as long as it does not impact the freedom of others.





Clean water rules?




Defunding the futures trading commission?




Criminal Code Improvement Act of 2015?


As I go through your list, I’m not sure you understand what Freedom means. I feel like you largely made a list of what you don’t like about what you perceive to be Republican laws (again a number of things listed were created by Democrats and/or were bipartisan) but no where did you make an argument for “Liberals being more in favor of freedom”. Being anti-Republican and even being against the things you perceive to be Republican attacks on Freedom is not the same thing as showing in what ways Liberals are larger proponents of Freedom.

P.S. Please also note that I am not a Republican (well I guess I am registered as one because I want to have a say in Utah politics, but so is my Sister-in-law who is a Democrat). Many Democrats are Liberals but seemingly few Republicans are Conservatives. This article points out that there are “at least” 173 R.I.N.O.s in the current Congress. People like Orrin Hatch and John McCain are certainly Republican but they are FAR from “conservative”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/01/06/there-are-173-rinos-in-the-114th-congress/

[Scott P]

I just believe that other people should be able to do pretty much whatever they want, as long as it does not impact the freedom of others.

I assume that you are a libertarian? Libertarians tend to be fiscal and economic conservatives, but moral and social liberals.

Generally conservatives believe in smaller government for economic issues and liberals believe in smaller government for social issues. Libertarians believe in smaller government for both.

Anyway, I also believe in your sentence above, but some issues could be argued either way.

A good example to start with would be the Clean Air Act. Would it be an example or curtailing freedom or allowing freedom?

Some could argue that it curtails freedom because it restricts certain businesses or individuals from polluting. On the other hand it can be said that people also have a right to not to breath the pollutants that are being put out by factories or automobiles.

Abortion can also be argued either way, as could public land issues, etc.

As far as whether or not claimed conservatives or liberal law makes curtail hinder freedom more in recent decades, I'd say that it is hard to say. For example, Utah is supposedly the most conservative state, but it has the most strict laws when it comes to gambling or alcohol.

As mentioned, by definition, conservatives believe in small government for economic and fiscal issues and liberals believe in small government for social issues. Of course as you point out, politicians do not follow the platform of what definitions are supposed to be.

Also, I know that many people including myself and probably most others have mixed views siding with different sides for different issues.

My own thought is that both main parties today need to be ditched. Bi-partisanship doesn't exist anymore unless politicians do so for their own gain, or so it seems. If a Democrat visited the park and said how cute a duck is, a Republican will come out with a policy against ducks, since ducks are evil. Well, that's really not a good example, but you get the idea.

Also, the three branches of government are not working as they are supposed to. For example, the Executive Branch of Government (of which the President belongs to) is not the branch of Government that is supposed to make the laws. It is the branch of Government that is supposed to ensure that the people follow the laws. Look how messed up that has become (and I am referring to both political parties and past presidents). Even if I agree with a law that the President or a crony has proposed, that's not how our government is supposed to work. It has been Congress won't work with the president and vice versa, but they aren't really supposed to either. They aren't supposed to be against each other either. They are supposed to balance each other.

It is no wonder that the country is so divided and messed up right now. Personally, I wish we would refer to each other as Americans, not just Democrats vs. Republicans, atheist vs Christians, liberals vs. conservatives. It doesn't mean we all have to agree on everything and in fact disagreements and diversities can be good, but it should mean that we're all in this together. I long for the days when we can refer to each other as Americans rather than always having to put a label on us just because we may believe a certain way about politics, religion, etc.

[DiscGo]

I assume that you are a libertarian
I have a lot of Libertarian views, but I wouldn’t identify myself as such.




Utah is supposedly the most conservative state, but it has the most strict laws when it comes to gambling or alcohol.


Great example! I have no idea how a state which prides itself on being so “conservative” can have a State run liquor store. The Government (outside of possibly selling liquor licenses) has no business being in the alcohol business.

Plenty of Republicans can be onboard with it, but I don’t believe any true Conservatives would be.






Also, I know that many people including myself and probably most others have mixed views siding with different sides for different issues.

My own thought is that both main parties today need to be ditched. Bi-partisanship doesn't exist anymore unless politicians do so for their own gain, or so it seems. If a Democrat visited the park and said how cute a duck is, a Republican will come out with a policy against ducks, since ducks are evil. Well, that's really not a good example, but you get the idea.
.

I totally agree! This is in part why I do not identify myself as belonging to a Political Party. This may sound like a stretch but Ralph Nader to me is a great example of what is wrong with Political Parties. I used to be a big fan (I even voted for him in 2000, and 2004). He came and spoke to my school while I was in college and I became very disillusioned with him. Nader started out a consumer advocate who fought for the little guy, but the speech he gave at UVU was clearly anti-big business. I don’t want to belong to any organization which is more anti than pro.



Also, the three branches of government are not working as they are supposed to. For example, the Executive Branch of Government (of which the President belongs to) is not the branch of Government that is supposed to make the laws. It is the branch of Government that is supposed to ensure that the people follow the laws. Look how messed up that has become (and I am referring to both political parties and past presidents). Even if I agree with a law that the President or a crony has proposed, that's not how our government is supposed to work. It has been Congress won't work with the president and vice versa, but they aren't really supposed to either. They aren't supposed to be against each other either. They are supposed to balance each other.


I totally agree. We have strayed from the Constitution and now we are without checks & balance. I don’t know what (if anything) could get us back on track.



It is no wonder that the country is so divided and messed up right now. Personally, I wish we would refer to each other as Americans, not just Democrats vs. Republicans, atheist vs Christians, liberals vs. conservatives. It doesn't mean we all have to agree on everything and in fact disagreements and diversities can be good, but it should mean that we're all in this together. I long for the days when we can refer to each other as Americans rather than always having to put a label on us just because we may believe a certain way about politics, religion, etc.

Again, I couldn’t agree more. My personal belief is that the average person in our country in a civil discourse can see eye to eye with even those they perceive to have opposing political views. Political parties, the Media, and special interest groups intentionally divide us for their own gain. I believe that individually are not nearly as divided as we are led to believe.

[DiscGo]

In a recent Facebook conversation with a friend, I suggested the following to resolve Mass Shootings and other major social problems:


I believe the solution would need to address a broader cultural problem and not just this one issue. My plan would be to fundamentally fix the country and I believe this would be resolved (except for the case of severe mental health issues) with it.

None of the things that I suggest would be popular but I believe they would be effective.

1. Create tax incentives to allow one parent to stay home to help raise the children (as much as possible). This doesn't have to be the woman (a number of people close to me have the Father stay home and the children are blessed for it).

2. With turning away from God (which our culture has in many ways) we have abandoned institutions where Youth learn service, discipline, team building etc. I would encourage more youth participate in organizations like the Boy Scouts, to promote growth within the individuals. For the record, when I mention our country "turning away from God", I am not saying that "mass shootings" are some sort of punishment for not worshiping God or something. But rather I am drawing a direct correlation in the decline of our country's interest in religion, with the decrease of social lessons associated with religion.

3. Get the people (especially the Youth) away from the television and into the Outdoors. Recent studies suggest that spending time in the wilderness is a major stress reliever for children and may be important to their development.

http://www.outsideonline.com/.../daily-dose-ecotherapy... (https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.outsideonline.com%2F20379 11%2Fdaily-dose-ecotherapy-eases-stress-kids%3Futm_source%3Dfacebook%26utm_medium%3Dsocial %26utm_campaign%3Dfacebookpost&h=cAQFqOVOb)



4. Promote more family time. I believe that people already know that guns are dangerous and a gun awareness program would do little. Instead promote a culture which has a strong emphasis in the family.

5. Keep score in youth sports. This may seem petty, but I believe that part of our problem is that we live in a nerf world, where we strive to be equal in all things. Let kids know from a young age that there are winners and losers and that is ok.

6. When you have a situation like this where it was clearly terrorism, don't call it "workplace violence". Instead address the issue head on, and develop a plan to thwart future terrorist attacks. The concept of disarming Americans because terrorists are attacking, is crazy to me.

7. Most difficult: Create a cultural shift from requiring everyone to be politically correct, and adjust our focus to understanding eachother. People take offense instead of focusing on the common ground. Nothing will be fix as long as both side are focused on blaming the other.

~

I don't know, I guess I will stop because I could likely go on forever. Have you ever read Giuliani's book "Leadership"? I strongly subscribe to his broken glass philosophy, and I believe the solutions for all of our problems are more pertaining to family values and less with legislation.

[Scott P]

I have no idea how a state which prides itself on being so “conservative” can have a State run liquor store.

I have noticed that many politicians who refer to themselves as conservatives, only mean so when it comes to Federal Government. The aren't necessarily for smaller State governments. Or so it seems to me, from my experience living in Utah.


1. Create tax incentives to allow one parent to stay home to help raise the children (as much as possible). This doesn't have to be the woman (a number of people close to me have the Father stay home and the children are blessed for it).

More than not working or getting tax incentives, I think just finding time to spend with your children is the solution. Some working parents spend more time with there children than non-working parents. Now days household chores don't take as long as they used to, so it is possible to balance work and kids (then again my wife and kids went somewhere today because I had to work in the morning).



2. With turning away from God (which our culture has in many ways) we have abandoned institutions where Youth learn service, discipline, team building etc. I would encourage more youth participate in organizations like the Boy Scouts, to promote growth within the individuals. For the record, when I mention our country "turning away from God", I am not saying that "mass shootings" are some sort of punishment for not worshiping God or something. But rather I am drawing a direct correlation in the decline of our country's interest in religion, with the decrease of social lessons associated with religion.

I used to feel that may and have made many post on Bogley supporting that viewpoint. I'm beginning to change my viewpoint though. There sure do seem to be a lot of hateful people that are religious (including some Christians and Mormons) and a lot of good people that are not religious. I think social media has made this even more apparent. For example, I cringe to see the kinds of things some of my so-called friends and fellow Church members are posting on places like Facebook, even those in higher ward positions (I am actually in the bishopric of an LDS ward).

Even though I am in a "high position" in a church, I no longer see much of a correlation between religious and non-religious people when it comes to be a decent human being. In fact the most secular nations have lower crime rates than religious nations for whatever reason. Obviously (at least I hope it is obvious), I believe religion to be important and I am not against religion, but can't say that I still believe that religious people in general are somehow better than the non-religious. This is the opposite viewpoint that I used to post on Bogley and elsewhere.


3. Get the people (especially the Youth) away from the television and into the Outdoors. Recent studies suggest that spending time in the wilderness is a major stress reliever for children and may be important to their development.

http://www.outsideonline.com/.../daily-dose-ecotherapy... (https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.outsideonline.com%2F20379 11%2Fdaily-dose-ecotherapy-eases-stress-kids%3Futm_source%3Dfacebook%26utm_medium%3Dsocial %26utm_campaign%3Dfacebookpost&h=cAQFqOVOb)


4. Promote more family time. I believe that people already know that guns are dangerous and a gun awareness program would do little. Instead promote a culture which has a strong emphasis in the family.

5. Keep score in youth sports. This may seem petty, but I believe that part of our problem is that we live in a nerf world, where we strive to be equal in all things. Let kids know from a young age that there are winners and losers and that is ok.

Agree with all of the above. I agree with #5, but also it is good if kids aren't super good in order to join a team. I believe access to wilderness is very important. National Park support used to be bipartisan, but not so much anymore.


6. When you have a situation like this where it was clearly terrorism, don't call it "workplace violence". Instead address the issue head on, and develop a plan to thwart future terrorist attacks.

I agree with this, but it should also be pointed out that only a small percentage of murders in the US are because of terrorism or mass shootings. That doesn't mean (by any means) that terrorism threats should be downplayed, but there are other dangers that need to be addressed as well.

As for myself, I'm fairly neutral when it comes to gun control. I do however believe background checks are a good idea.

I have an in-law (who shall remain nameless) who has threatened to kill my parents many times and has all kinds of access to guns. He also has mental issues. Should he have access to guns? I don't know where to draw the line.


7. Most difficult: Create a cultural shift from requiring everyone to be politically correct, and adjust our focus to understanding eachother. People take offense instead of focusing on the common ground. Nothing will be fix as long as both side are focused on blaming the other.

I agree, within reason. It is also both parties (and maybe every group) that is taking offense to everything.

I think we should be politically correct when it comes to calling people racial slurs, derogatory comments towards women, or any other people (without cause and simply because they are of a certain race, sex, belief, etc.), but taking offense to everything is stupid.

Since it's that time of year, no one should be offended if someone says Merry Christmas, but no one should be offended if someone wanted to say Happy Holidays.

I think I would disagree with your previous statement that is only or mostly the liberals doing this. Look how many so called conservatives are getting offended at things like the design of a Christmas cup (Starbucks hates Jesus) or how many people are offended at the phrase Happy Holidays. I don't think there is any difference of people getting offended if someone says Merry Christmas or if a business wants to say Happy Holidays.

Of course that's a whole different topic.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One thing not said above though is the role of the media in violence and fear. You would think that by the way the media reports everything that this is that things are worse now then they have ever been. As someone pointed out earlier, crime rates are at a historic low. Actually, deaths from warfare (from a population standpoint) are near or at historic lows as well. The way the media reports it, the world is ready to crash and burn with every passing second. There are lots of positive things going on as well. That doesn't mean that we should let our guards down, but there is more than gloom and doom happening in the world as well.

[DiscGo]

More than not working or getting tax incentives, I think just finding time to spend with your children is the solution. Some working parents spend more time with there children than non-working parents.
.

That is certainly true. My brother became a stay at home Dad about 5 years ago, and the improvement in his children was amazing. I think having parents who are really checked in makes a huge difference and it is difficult to offer tax incentives for being a good parent but having a stay at home parent is a metric easy enough to track.





There sure do seem to be a lot of hateful people that are religious (including some Christians and Mormons) and a lot of good people that are not religious… no longer see much of a correlation between religious and non-religious people when it comes to be a decent human being.


Sure. I’m with you. I am not saying everyone needs to go back to church, or worship God to be good. It works for me and my family, but I get that everyone needs to do what works for them. I was referring more to programs like Scouting where (traditionally) boys have been taught good life skills, instilled good values, and experienced some risks while doing hard things. The military could just has easily fill this role (again largely a non-secular organization) but it would be a lot less fun that scouting.



In fact the most secular nations have lower crime rates than religious nations for whatever reason.
.
This sounds more like correlation and effect rather than cause and effect. With the exception of China (which does not allow religious Freedom) the other secular countries are more developed / educated. I don’t believe that religion (in general) makes people commit crime but rather more likely is these nations are more highly educated and thus more skeptical of God (I’m not saying anything against God or the belief in God here. Just that the idea of God was used for generation to fill the gaps in what mankind could not understand. So if your belief in God was dependent on what you didn’t understand, then the belief of deity decreased with a greater understanding of the world).




I agree with #5, but also it is good if kids aren't super good in order to join a team.
.
Sure, but as kids age they should be cut for lack of skill, work ethic, etc. and be allowed to have MVPs, winners, etc.
Remember the Alanis Morrisette song “Perfect”? There is a line “Don’t forget to win first place” One way we can teach kids that they don’t have to be perfect is allowing them to see that everyone has different talents and you are not expected to be the best (or even great) at everything.


I believe access to wilderness is very important. National Park support used to be bipartisan, but not so much anymore.
.




I agree with this, but it should also be pointed out that only a small percentage of murders in the US are because of terrorism or mass shootings. That doesn't mean (by any means) that terrorism threats should be downplayed, but there are other dangers that need to be addressed as well.
.
True. But cards on the table, most murders (statistically) are black on black crimes and would also be addressed with increased family focus.



I have an in-law (who shall remain nameless) who has threatened to kill my parents many times and has all kinds of access to guns. He also has mental issues. Should he have access to guns? .

No, he should not. Though the sad part is even without a gun, your family is still at risk.



I think we should be politically correct when it comes to calling people racial slurs, derogatory comments towards women, or any other people (without cause and simply because they are of a certain race, sex, belief, etc.), but taking offense to everything is stupid.
.

Sure, I’m with you. I guess my biggest problem with political correctness, is that it is used in such a way that it can destroy people. I believe you should seek understanding before offense but even if someone says something genuinely offensive (like Mel Gibson towards Jews), people should be able to be forgiven over time and frequently they are written off forever.




Since it's that time of year, no one should be offended if someone says Merry Christmas, but no one should be offended if someone wanted to say Happy Holidays.
.


Agreed. I don’t see how anyone can take offense at someone wishing them a happy holiday, Hanukkah, Christmas, etc.. But sadly people in both camps get offended.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One thing not said above though is the role of the media in violence and fear. You would think that by the way the media reports everything that this is that things are worse now then they have ever been. As someone pointed out earlier, crime rates are at a historic low. Actually, deaths from warfare (from a population standpoint) are near or at historic lows as well. The way the media reports it, the world is ready to crash and burn with every passing second. There are lots of positive things going on as well. That doesn't mean that we should let our guards down, but there is more than gloom and doom happening in the world as well.[/QUOTE]

I watched a couple of American propaganda videos from 1945 about Japan. Some parts reminded me of “The Office” when Michael Scott says “You will never come together as one to defeat us”. It just seemed so blatant and I had the thought that people in 1945 must have been far more trusting of our Government to accept that. Then I wondered how much more effectively our Government uses propaganda today, and what people 70 years from now will say about us.
<br>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfD9eAFXSvA

[DiscGo]

There might not be any atheists in the foxholes, but, when was the last time an angry psycho atheist committed mass murder?

Believe in God? No guns for you.



@"Brian in SLC (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?432-Brian-in-SLC) "
Okay, cards on the table. Do you actually believe the things you say or are you just trolling?

Just for anyone else who may not know,

Jared Lee Loughner (the guy who shot Gabby Giffords) is an atheist who not only injured 13 people with a gun but killed 6 in that attack is an atheist.

Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City Bombing) was an atheist.

The list goes on and on, but the point is that this is not just a Christian / Religious thing.

[Scott P]

Do you actually believe the things you say or are you just trolling?

I believe he's making fun of the post he was quoting which says that banning democrats from owning guns will eliminate mass shootings.

[Brian in SLC]

@"Brian in SLC (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?432-Brian-in-SLC) "
Okay, cards on the table. Do you actually believe the things you say or are you just trolling?

Just for anyone else who may not know,

Jared Lee Loughner (the guy who shot Gabby Giffords) is an atheist who not only injured 13 people with a gun but killed 6 in that attack is an atheist.

Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City Bombing) was an atheist.

The list goes on and on, but the point is that this is not just a Christian / Religious thing.

Mostly a response to the Democrat thing (which Scott referenced). But, it makes me wonder about the correlation between religion and killing oreven just being disrespectful.

McVeigh wasn't an avowed atheist at the time he killed all those people. His history is a strange de-conversion then just before his execution he took the sacrament. Who knows what he really believed?

Loughner is certifiably crazy.

Its interesting to me that most of my rabid 2nd amendment friends are strongly Christian. Cause and effect? I dunno.

'Preciate the dialog.

[Iceaxe]

Its interesting to me that most of my rabid 2nd amendment friends are strongly Christian. Cause and effect? I dunno.

I think it has more to do with you either support the constitution and bill of rights or you do not. If one of your rights is allowed to be usurpered it sets a bad president for taking others.

Many mistake my support of the entire constitution as being pro gun, but they are wrong as I'm actually pro Constitution. It's just that the 2nd amendment is the part the is currently under siege.

FWIW I'm atheist. But I also believe you either support the constitution or you do not. We don't get to pick and choose to support just the parts that appeal to us.

[Brian in SLC]

FWIW I'm atheist. But I also believe you either support the constitution or you do not. We don't get to pick and choose to support just the parts that appeal to us.

So...regulate me already....sheez...

Cheers...and...we should get together soon. You and your's and me and mine. Just about got my pizza recipe perfected and I need some victims to try it out on...

[oldno7]

.,.,

[oldno7]

Nice when one controls the "list"

[Iceaxe]

WOW... Obama just sucked ISIL dick on live TV.

[Mtnseeker1]

Not sure how we stop it. If you bring a bigger gun someone brings a nuke. One thing I do know is all good peeps want Freedom. Family, And to prosper all around this world. I say kill isis and don't stop till we are all govment free world wide... I know way to rad right? But it would be a great start...... Then we take care of these punks like Gang bangers. It will never happen and will only get worse. I'm not a bible thumper but I do read. We are doomed and will go out like the dynos. Sad part is our time here will be but a drop in the bucket of time on this great planet.

[accadacca]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/06/1bf2990356bdad86f2c521eec1b94d71.jpg

[oldno7]

anyone have an answer?

[oldno7]

Bueller, Bueller...........

[Sombeech]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHmwD2VElyE

[Scott P]

anyone have an answer?

I was curious about the statistics, so I looked it up:

http://www.snopes.com/mass-shootings-obama/

[Scott P]

.I went through all the stats I could find and put them on a simple spreadsheet. If there are any corrections that need to be made, let me know. I believe this list to be accurate. Since Bush Sr. was a one term presidency, statistically Clinton has the least shootings/deaths per term and Obama the most. Of course, I still think there are a lot more factors than simply the president though.

82471

Later, I will create a similar chart with all murders (unless someone else wants to do it).

[kiwi_outdoors]

Answer - stop the flow of money that is buying military materiel (bullets, guns etc)

[double moo]

I saw a post today about an article stating how crazy it would be if more americans were armed, rationalizing that no one but the cops has the tacticl training to be of any use armed. I then looked up the Veterans of military service numbers... 21.8 million americans that have served! Allowing for old age and other factors that woud disqualify one from being "useful"... and i be there are still a lot of weapons trained individuals that could effectively stop an incident. I'm sure there are a lot of citizens that could be of help too, but had to agree that there are many who could certainly make things worse. Still... 20,000,000 is a pretty good number of weapons trained helpers.

[twotimer]

I grew up in a rural part of the country, where guns (especially rifles) are second nature. At least, among myself and my friends.

I was in Costco today...and I considered what I'd do if someone or someone(s) burst in firing rounds...I was wondering how many people might be packing???

Statistically, the odds are long that I'd be killed in a terrorist attack...but then I'm sure the people that were slaughtered in Paris and San B. thought the same thing.

I'm going through the process of getting a concealed carry permit...for the first time.

I'm not sure I'd like living in a country where I was denied the right to do that.

http://www.bogley.com/forum/image/jpeg;base64,/9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQAAAQABAAD/2wCEAAkGBxMTEhUTExMWFRUXGBgXFxgYGBcYGhgYFh0XFxcYGx gdHSggGBolHRcXITEhJSkrLi4uFx8zODMtNygtLisBCgoKDg0O GBAQGi0lHx8tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0rLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS 0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLf/AABEIAL8BCAMBIgACEQEDEQH/xAAcAAABBQEBAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAQIDBQYABwj/xAA/EAABAwIEAwYDBgUDAwUAAAABAAIRAyEEBRIxBkFREyJhcYGRMr HBFCNCodHwM1JicuEHFoIkwvEVRFNjsv/EABkBAAMBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAgMEBf/EACcRAAICAgIBBAICAwAAAAAAAAABAhEDIRIxBBMiQVFhoRQyM 0KR/9oADAMBAAIRAxEAPwCge09L CdTcVZVMtI2BPluo/8A058AxPUC5C5pTkn0elj8fFOEXyp/Iym/2RlGrEnaII8xcQhm5a63d/CfQ8vVF0sK4NBMyItEkeiIZG3VE5/GhjSale j0bKMzZXphzHAxAcOhi4U JxbWFocYL3aW257 iwmUscWPa0OBFVlQi4JYIBMc9jZWlGhUc5rix8fai4agZDI3g7 BaRyOugn48U37ug3jYgUWEkCKjd/UH5rBVHNkmRuYXoPGbmjDmW6nSNNpgggyT ELBOoENLt/Q3J6CFOST5UTjwxlDk7u6A6tT18kI6reytBl74Fr8/NCHDw OahzaSf2EcEJTkk9JP8AQPTqlF00w0CDpjvTy3/wnabGZIBM fTxSWRu9GuXxIx41K7CaTJPzXoPCWW9nT1kd pB8m/hH19VgcBhSRIbLdTJANgCQAHHlPPotrldQtNYCoymBUpix1sAI EtBPMq8eS30Rl8VQWpXRpoWY4rzaJoMNz/EI5A/hnkTz6DzXcXYw0n0XMeQ TDSTEQRqLdjc81jsS462HUTJMyd7TJ8Vc8tWvojH47lW 03/wACE0hQYt5AEGJIBPQHdR17QATGoDf67rOWVKysXiuaTvu/0TEXTSFB/MJMC4v9U6iDpBkmQNzKlZOTqhZPF4R5cvr9qyQppUBmbOmJ1Ts OgHiuouPcOrcEn/Ch5V0arwZceSa6skcFGQnsMF o2EcoiyhY SbiIEeCSyIh JNcvwrEcOqaU5xSNC0bOQaAu7MrQZfwxXqUxUaGNDvh1EgkdbA wEb/siqd61Mf8XH6qabHaMeQB4 KYXFafGcF12iWllTwEg x3WdxGHcww9paehEKXoAchNT3gjYJWt6pBYjAuUgalTCzUlcSp a1ItcWuEOHL6 SiK7TLZ2pOaV1GnqMX62uelvEkgDxcPJV1WviG4k0/s7uxA/iy2BMx/d8JJaBqAEkQigsucuxHZ1mPOx7h8nbfnHuty0eS8hp5q9lU0q4 Ap1HObRqgEDU0lvZvv3X92Qdj8tbiOIa1PBCsHM1Nr06J1N7oa 57GOm47w1EzIHghIdmlzrDh1CqNjodfyErEMdYeQWizvH1vs2K fhq1Gu6lTDg1rZ21OqNJa8glzI0gXBHMOCw BzEmtTZINOrR7WkYgkgjU0/wDFzXCw59END5FqTZIqSrnGioxtZ4pMe0vZULQA6XO0sLjLWEM DSZiS7lEG5okwNRBPUCAb2O5i0c1LiJSaHQueQASRYX638koKs sgwHa1pPwUoJ8X/AIR6b yXFD5y y7yDKzTpQ NT 88QIk7N9BAU Yvp0KZc6NIMhult3cgB1VhWqtY0ucQABJJ2AC86z/NzXqSLMbZg/7j4n8gr0kPk29sFxVc1XF9SHPdvzgdBOwCHexpuQD6JoeucbLF otZJqt9DjexUZpt2gR0 qbK7Uk0mEcsorTFdDQYHoOaVj7bR4f8AhMJXBCSQpZJPtisptG w/M/JKyk0Gw fNNJU1KiSJJgeKngi35GX7Gtw4Fxz3uTKhrUee0/RXWFpMDZJEqsx8SoaSYerN9sCIA2V3wvk3bvL3/wAJhEzs53Jvl1VLSplzg0bkgDzJhb uWUKTaTfhaAP7ndbbkmUpSSVmbLN NA Hbr iDfmgHMe/0Chw Fc7vVNuTJ5f1H6BEPfp2aB5QuGeSXyzWGJy7BnZsBzHukxDqVd umoAbWP4h4gpK1VxBET4ESs3j8Q5jtQEdQOiyjmd6NH4zq0UWN pFj3M6EhQgo3Oqoc8ObzAPqq8NXfDaMKJdSVcGlcrsR7BmmVtr C9nDZ375LJ4vCupu0uEHryPkrHKeIy2GVjI2Dv1/VX2LwzK7ORnZw5L0GR2YDG0ahb91UNKoCC18B0EEEAgggiQD4E NIuAgMvwWJBHb4guA0jTIIOiYN2jvd4gv8AiIJBMK2zTB1qLtL pIOzhsVXuFXxStrRDQ92AbUpPpVmAtc55ImbOc5wMxZwkeRXZX k9d2HOED21H9tSrNfUcW6m0ntdBIaTq0tA23ukZTqeKOy5z6dV jydjfyNj /BIZvKWsvcXU2NaRchxc5x5A90ANAnrM8ov5M/hl1NvZtfDqWIOg820C547OY/8AjqPPmV6 HyLLA53hXGvVjm6fyCbGA4ulq1MfTY mYsSPUFpEQLXBJvta8eT4HsaLKUzpnmTEknSCbkCYHg0JDgqn8 35pzMG8fiUkhmnkBJMADqTsFtsqy5tGmGbndx6uO5/fRZ7hPLCXmq/Zndb0LjufQW9VY8TZv2bezYfvHbn VvXzPJNFFNxZmAe7smHutPeP8zunkPms84KVyjlTIEyMBI8WSl 1xY acQoYyApFNpTXM9EgoiJTm3SPewcx6pzKrd5lAxwaFIGnmkZiG qb7U2LR7J02TYVTxGlunr4KtxG6JZL7jp0QtelCiUSkyTKCO3p f3Ao5 LdXxulvwUpJ/u5nz5KowzXawWiSDIVlw3h6rQbAanzUcWmT4A8gD9VzZema44N uy2zDiY0rNphw6l1z4wmYHikVbaI/fgocx4dqu F5uZs7THh4onL8jdS70y62mbwfGTsuZxTj TrVJ2JmWddmDIv7LK4vP3VQRob73V9xTgXPqw4iY3Aj629FQMw FQWlx6yZEdEsUIL 3ZUnKlxAsNdjSVKwKSvqGkaA3fpt5DZcym88l2xi2jhk6YTQad wJ/NcuYCNyB6pUemybLAuReW5pUonumW82nb06KvL7wuL16nE5OZ6 FhsVSxVOLeLTuFm80yt9A/zMOx6eBVLRxDmkOaSCOYWsyniBtUaK0A7TyP6FQ40aKaeihAPR LJ6H2R ecP6e wnSeh2/wAKhdhm/wAx90qC6N7w5itdEAmXN7p h9lScS92uT1aPqoOE8SKdXRqs/x5j9/kiONqQLmE8wfyRQ70UjsT4j3T6Di4hrbucQAB W/oq4Uqc8vzWp4UwTGNdiXAAAENJ6D4j67JUSXVaq3C0B/SIbNtTj/AJuV57icS5znOdckyT4/orHPM1dWqatmizR0HXzKp6r 9vuj8D5Dw4n8KZKlpiR5IarU0lEo6FGRJT3UzmxA6kADmSbAIX C1pcAdzYX/AHKIxeHLIfzBB9rhZNGi2W9LIK0XYUo4ZqmToN pH6qr/wB2V v5lNPFOI/n f6rohwic8lNszvEz9FRzWhw0Etd0JV5w1gqmKphzGtaJLZLgJL QJIttcKtzGoa09oRcyYtJTMDV7PusdG x6xKTkuQ Do1NXhGsd6lJv/P/AAnYTIOyILq1A9YLnH3NvYBU7X1HRvvzVzgsoLhLjbzuF1Qhe0 cs8lJo1uSUKbmOiHciYA iy/FOBbSd3TY8uivuD6WgVW6pGq0oPitgcVyeRH3HXgl7EZnK6QdL tOot EHqefotHkD4pAb7z5zdU2Eq9mZAm1wfyRXDOMBDmk3BK8jysU4 3JdHqePmjKKiy8rV2tFmiSgX5q2gQajHlxNrEgeqJxTw0atzyC rMTXrPF6LY5mo8A gGy5ISbZ0uKaoDxWbCvVkTI9lFjsUQCPcIKtWLHfw9Pi0yPzQ2 Y4vuknon6bclQ9RQuDGoCHEkk2a0uPWP8KPH1W0iBUFQEiYMgw drGEI3M3im2mazmtEkNZAjVYyRfZMwWHoPJl5nq50fRexCKSPK m7Zo8mY6qGlgpt1GBqLi63PS0QB5lcuw9cua1gruc1tg0PeQBs LLk6RnsraWJcTCU4wdR4q1oYdrfwwepCqsVw 1xkVNMmeXNevPA49M4I5oy7CKTp5hTsk2T8LSYwadQMc qnqYtjQDIIJ3R6KrZDyu9IsMrzepS7rpezobkDwS5phqL /RIJNy2CgBmLI3PoCkweZNAAhxvyCX8eP2H8iVdHUcPUa4ODACC CPRXHFONFSk0hpGk3JHyQbM1m3Zu87IbMMeXsc0sIHWQh4IBHy JkOGwFRwDpABvYCYPqis0zcvY2kxuim2BEyTG08gEmEzCiKDga oY9ohodMH97KnwuInf8AfjdYzjBLXZspZL30SGg53gOp2TTh2l wmoD5CZRtSrLSP3a6bmeLpu0aWsa0FploJLiOroErGU4QatG2P HLJdPoKyjBjW8OO20gT nzWbzrFOLr2MmwEADlfclaWi8dob3I6hY/OsQ4VHjSDDrEQLcvNdmdQ4PicuFT5qxmDqHU07kOGy1maAFpHg svlAcZ1E78jZaRwbp XNcHp3GzsjOp0YSphHkkAnfqk zVAPit/crzLm0mVKxq0XVQTLe WARvtvyVRjMNTc7UxhZqmGySR5k7rC6NietQaaLJcNzckD0XYW jpOqQYvYyi6WVzQZTmTqtyF soPBtFF5pOLHgn4h3gOsTaUJ7K4OjQ0K9WJYw7bkInA46se7UD r7NBjfyEqqxObhgLAxw2u4yesg8iVLhcx77HNJEESRuD4Ertjl fF7OGWNWrRsOH6pDz3dIAMiSZnmZSZw4uJ39EJlWKPaVLyIG5k k9Sm47EuJtK55Sd2zaMUtIAdSdaVU1ajqNTtAbGxWmp4Fzyxur 4yB5T/hDZjw4 jTqtcNXe1NI5j9Vjlft2b4Y 4ShmWsNh4v15J Z06bgNVa/QLH3GygrVndSuT IvhnWvIaLjHV2tENdI5zuqPFYkvPgmCXGN S9C4W4WpsaXVWsqOIENeJa0fqVtjxKBlkzOR5/Touc3wTqWFdqgAz 5XsNPI6ANsPRM7gMAH5oo8P4c/8At6QtyEH3AWyMm0eYcM6GOc6pJtYAgX6lKvQqnB HOzSz 17vkZC5VxslmdzLEvquD3aRYAAbIUsaZMBF0cma5hdqcYHjErO 53iNAAAj8N5m3OF6Ucp58sVsKyir969tSIAPQBEYhzdNiLFZqH CC5pAPM2VtkmlzqlOJGkkSefL6rL1Wm7NXjTSotsvzGm10OGoE chKgZjGAneCZsFX1KLYBdUFO/jMbbJauPaxoDIe4fjcHQR4CQhZqldmTxco1QfUzBsbkECQDuQF VYniMFv8Ox3u75iAq45vdxIbPMgEekSm4nGa2RpIky517/AOAEepKUnvRosUIpXE02T08TUp2oANf8LjYGNmjmYHNaPDYikz DAGmyTIqGx7/OTzNlVOzij2TGYelWquY1o1S4hoPK3XyWax BxGgOqU3sZqJlwIbJ8PquaUW7pnVGSVcl0bPhXL6dVz3vGprYA B Ek3v1tyQHFeMomqeybOiznDbVyaB0Cx1DOMRTboa6oG3gCQOk y0eNzHCOwNKmyQ9plzeerZxeepRJWtjjSevkqRWJgiw69fJMe1 pfrJ9OXqhvtnIWQ1XEKUmJ0WRrsbsP0XHHuKpftChrYs7BMVF1 Ux n4nifdB4jNKZ3M ipywncppoJUhl1QxsgtaZG/ihC46vFVhYRcIzD4mbO35FUnXQ6LGgxzg6xJHimhjgb77o7Ava 1hAmTd0xbwEKzybKjiXxSpkn8RgBrfEuSslk/DNR2sgumRZa3CZFUqn RvNx3PkOasch4SpUIe/7yoNifhafAc/MrSBHH7BIAweV06caRJH4jc/49EuNIMj8keo6tMEXAKGiked8ScOsd95T7psI2BlYPH4dzHlhE Ebr2PMsESCGEeTrj9 SwHEOU1XVS7s4JizZIWdUWvyV3CmCDqmt2wkjzG5XoWUVNzsDs spkGDc1ul1i1xtG8gLW4IQFLEy6ohENdbyUFB9k41LJgTteuQr qi5OwMVkefVaVEtqBs/gAib8zfZUzqdZ8vdRc90yCW7eI8EFj81q0gzsyBq3MAn3KEo5x WdVYKlVzgXCRyv5Le6ZzVZLicW7WA9mo7RH1V79lp4cNq06XeP xd9xmx25D2TjlrXVu1OwFgjsVp096YHz5IcnIpaMDjcy1n4I83 E/KEF9tdsIA8p abmPcqPb0JCBNRFFk9eo4OjVAKbHiSoqlUugnlZOmWzfz5Jgen 8N5/SwVIMfL3P0vlsWkczuSISZ5x1h8TTNHRUYwuEvJDTAvYCSvM6c 7go/CVqYvUpmqIsDUcBPWyFB/ArSIMZ2faEsedPW 3S 5UvbNIgWH7v5qtzKoC4lrQ0G4aDIHhe6gZVKlqhouHV igNRQtdZOSKH600kDcgJgceXukbTv1/NJsdDu1HKVwerLBZFiKv8PD1HeOkx7myv8J/p5i3Xf2dIf1Ok zZ amx0Y8hRPZF16E//T iwfe4wf8AFkfNyy/EORnDuADtbHfC5SskbqyuDqwfKsSA4B86ZGqN45x4r3nhujRbh 6fYCKZaCOpncnq5fO9MwV6R/ppxEWO zvPdd8Pg7p6rRGbR6qAnKIvtKVrrSqsB5Kie5dqlNKQ0gXEUHO 5wFQZpVqscWU2B8bveT7ADYLUVn6Wk yqm0jAm/X1uokBR4ShUcZfpn kQrbD0SAptAlSMPd81AzmmE5zrJzxsFHXsQEAI111ya3dcgZ5V mwLqchvwOid1Tg3BBJgz0WhbnsQNIAPxCN pPin18S14dTLWw74XAAGU4ZXJ1JUPJgUI3F2di8 dTA0taZG7voFWVuJ8Qdi0eTR9UXVyhzw0OqMpxzdP0CbgeH6L3 BpxBJcdmM5ebiIXZjnGK2cslZk8wque4ucZJMkoQrd8T8Mtbp7 EANBIcdQ2EQ5ziYk3sNlkzQaDbvfJZuab0WtAIajMHUjuu A3jxRuHwFZ1mUnSejSVb4fgjGOiWBv9zgPyCV2MztIN1d8kDo2 FLXYah00KboAuTcnxPJoWmdwDWtqq0h170x4bXVVnuUPwcDXqD xciQJ6eKrm0qRNKzL4g3uombp9bdRsN1DZYc6pC13B3CTcQ3t8 S806MkNAMOeRvB5NH5rEtC9AqVtdOmDJAa1tOm0wAAP2SSscs KNcUOTNBTyTKqPJryP53k/lMK2wONwrQOyZSZ00taJ9YXmtelRBvUaHc2tDnAebtifJWeVUx LQLQRsuPLklV2dkMMfo9Gq4xwaT4LHZ5m9Zw7riwTvzK2lDBE0 r3ssdmmXPLxyE7iLAefNc75Km/k1x8XaXwVmCw5b36jS8m/fcJj 0ldm GbUoP0CI70dCOg5JMBk4ZWLqjg9t4G8k7alpMryVppvn8YIVzn xaaYqVNNHkjwi8BiC0ggwQQQehGybmWFNN72HdriPZDU3L04u0 edJbPe Hs27fDNqTeId4OG6uQ7ujxXj3AGavbW7Ke5UFx4i4K9cbUho9l SIJ1zblRzslL4HigoixJ1OAQ2NrBswJjeERS3JPK6BovsSfxEn 3UsBlKqHCeo2U1MWaOglNqPHIXUum3ooAcx0mUO pLiR5J5MKFzkAPauTWlIgZ57/tas4ToInmbKSjwlWjvOY0 Lp S1hdO6aVXDd2P1nVUVH 3ZZoqV5HPS0/Mrm8KYYG5qu8CQ36WVwF0rSkYgRyPDbdjIHJz3uHtKKw Ep0/gp02 IaPrKfKSUqAl7R3UjysmOv4pJSSmA EJmWBZWYWVBIPuPJThyQvTQHi e4Lsaz6czpO6r1c8Wn/qq3936KmSZRPRH52XpeA4eJoseZ H36rH1MvpNwmHqtLi973B 2kaTsPHb2K9uy91PsmAbaRHsuXyfg3wy4vo85xGX0e0D zdLY7osDGy1OSZfrJqOYBP5rQsy2m4zpEKSu8M0tHsuWUZSjcn o6PVitQWwvCshsKsxGGaSQ66tcO Qq/Fsl5A81p5EV6UfwYYpPmwSlw9TBkBFVA1ndAiFHRx5HdPKy6vW BC5JPG4 3s3rI5e7o8m49pAYp5H4gD /ZZhi03Hz/8AqT/a36rLsK9LB/jRz5v7s9K/06yYsa7EPAu2Kfkdyt/2s6B6rGcHYn7prJ3Zb05fvqtVgny4eAW5gWbXXJTKr1FUrafNQ YivHmhjRJiakU45uMIXFu72kGIACSjU1vk7MEnzUWXA1e0cdif yUsAjD0xuTPgEeIuCo8PhRTaANv3zSRJISQxlSioxhwiXDko3O AQArmgDkuQjqwJsVyQFbKRN1JupbGY/Ul1KKVwKAJdSSVHK4lAEkpE2UkoAcmkpJSOKAPI Jnziax/rKqVZ8RCMRVH9ZVUUFF5gcwH2SpRduHtqU/A7OHt816PwJmva0GtJuzunyGy8gpusVoeD847CsCT3Xd130Kwz Q5RNsUuMj2ypjYHRCMxJ1a41aZgKtdigQI90TSzCnTbLnADxXl TlLklZ6CxxStIbV4r0kgsc3zEIRudVax 7EE2JN4CEzPiSg zG6vH9Ag8Pj6gP3NMgeX1KqbnLRUMSW0qNcKUNvv1Qj8THNUVL F4p7u85oHPqn47GinTc4m4ErncfdRaVdmC4qxWvE1D4x7ABUwd dOxFbU4k7kk 91FN17kFUUjycjuTZruDc27OqxrjDTIk8pH6r1LKn2JXhNIr1z hXF6sEHE3 E i0Rky/wx1PLuQVbi8UX1CAjK1TsqBPNyDyDDSTUdsLlS0NBeMHZUQwfE/dPwJ0CEF2prVi7kLBWLjBjwUjCHYiyge8gEg3MwocLqqEzLQD7 onGNtGyFsCufji3dDYjMS6wPqjquAB K6iGAY3ltdIASlW0brkfQoA3j6rkCor9SQuSEpritbIHFyTUo5 SgosB8rkzUllOxDlwKZqS6kAKSm6kkpCUwPLOLmRiqviZ9wFSO K1fH9CKwfyc3fxHL2WRJQUPaVI18KJqc4pMpM3vC/EGoCk83Aseo6K dSZVPeEgcl5NSqkGQtvwvn7HdyoYdyPVef5GB/2id2HN/qy qNFP G0D0CYx1Z zTCuqdSjEmCkrZ0xkABcPqS6O5N1obhsO/T3hCyHHWNDQKQNzc XJXWccX02Axc9F5pmGOdVe57jcn/wFv42CTnzfSOXyMqUa SElKDdRtKXVderR51htIrV8JZ0KThTqH7pzpn U7T5LHtqjqp2VwglnsGY4oV6rWUzLG8xsVZZpVFKkKbdyvKeHe In4aoHAam82nn i2OX56zFVQXd13JpPyPNAWaPLKIa2SiMIJdqOyjrmwYFO9s6Wj koGF/aQLASUPiHy4BS0qekWhBPq94n0TYIILpM8gg8Q SAOalr1dLUNhLulQ2MPb3W S5RY18NSJoVlLqXSqeliaApNDg4v1jVEyW6rwdURptETN5Rxxm CLXCHai0w4B4AdpgEAvNpOq87RfdamaZO4pJVTjq9B1SWa20yW WMywbPIuZNgf Xgj/tuCh/cdJdLQdXdEU7GHXaHCod5gjzDETylLkBhMThZd2rXkFxIczU2G xEBpeYEkncnut5EhPbUwP8A9wMum8gN72k8iTZtrTq5RdUMMld qQmV3pj1VjQwT3/CJ9QhDB3OVPmueNpkMb33uIAE2E9T9Ezjio/D6KUwXN1GJ2mAJWIwdXVXZJ5z7SmB2e4w1HvBc4hpi/Mze3IKnbS59EXUMtqu562j/APU/IJKY 4qHo5n5ygoCduucUjiulMBAU9rlCHJ8pNFFhSzSq0QHlMq5hUd u8oLUklZ nHui/Ul1ZM56bqTJSyrohseCnSowU7UmQPabqcFDtNk9jkAFMejMLiS 1wI3BBHoq1pUjX3QB69wpnrcR8VqjRcdfELQtNieq8YyHMTRrM qDkYPiDuvYO07oI6CPVQ0CeyarWMQhqF3KF1Xruua/SxzzudlBQzGV5dCLwogKpw5kyrBr4CVCTFxlSYC5B1qq5ANn/2Q==

I would want to kill these people before they killed me.

[oldno7]

I was curious about the statistics, so I looked it up:

http://www.snopes.com/mass-shootings-obama/

And ya know how I know snopes is a leftist internet rag?

Do a search on it for the claims of 355 mass shootings so far this year.

That is the number touted by this administration and several alphabet news agencies( i use the term news lightly)

[Scott P]

Do a search on it for the claims of 355 mass shootings so far this year.

Actually, if you see, I quantified all mass shootings in a spreadsheet above. If there are any corrections to the spreadsheet that need to be made, let me know, but as far as I could find, I believe it to be accurate.

[Brian in SLC]

Actually, if you see, I quantified all mass shootings in a spreadsheet above. If there are any corrections to the spreadsheet that need to be made, let me know, but as far as I could find, I believe it to be accurate.

Interesting data and trends, Scott.

Trying to brainstorm what accounts for the uptick.

Assault weapons ban sunsetted in 2004...interesting in light of your data.

Economy went up and down.

Immigration stats? Not a real huge jump upwards?

Increase in availability of violent video games?

Increase in hate group activity?

Rise of conservative talk radio?

Change in cable news format?

Increase in mental illness?

Congress doing less and wasting more time?

Availability of ammunition for assault rifles?

Price of assault rifles?

Hard to effect a remedy when the cause isn't apparent...

[oldno7]

No--these claims which have been reported and repeated by most media outlets


http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/12/san_bernardino_mass_shootings_map_us_syracuse.html

[oldno7]

local station/ news agency--perpetuating the 355 myth...

http://national.deseretnews.com/article/6904/the-role-of-masculinity-and-mental-illness-in-mass-shootings.html


Editor's Note: As the nation deals with its 355th mass shooting of 2015,
Read more at http://national.deseretnews.com/article/6904/The-role-of-masculinity-and-mental-illness-in-mass-shootings.html#ZuBPVAgSgqRvtyMr.99

[oldno7]

and still no de bunking on snopes part!

liberal rag, no merit whatsoever.

[Brian in SLC]

and still no de bunking on snopes part!

liberal rag, no merit whatsoever.

Interesting discussion though...

http://www.snopes.com/351-mass-shootings/

What do you think needs to be debunked?

The definition of "mass" is debatable. That's discussed.

Do you think multiple people weren't shot in a number of cases? Which cases? The information is out there.

You posted a chart of the mass shootings and how they've gone way up under Obama. Do you not believe your source for that information to be credible?

Like Scott did with his data, easy enough to figure out whatever number you want based on the criteria you want.

Given that, what's your number? And based on what criteria? Or, are you waiting for some credible source to figure it out for you?

[Brian in SLC]

I grew up in a rural part of the country, where guns (especially rifles) are second nature. At least, among myself and my friends.

Me too. And, I lost friends to gun accidents. And had plenty of close calls (whew...ugh...). So, yeah, my parents wouldn't let me have a BB gun but I could walk out the door with any firearm in the house.

So...yeah, second, but deadly, nature.


I'm going through the process of getting a concealed carry permit...for the first time.

In Utah, its not much of a process. More of a "show up and pay money" deal.


I'm not sure I'd like living in a country where I was denied the right to do that.

I would want to kill these people before they killed me.

Wouldn't we all?

Would you charge in at great risk to yourself even if you didn't know anyone in the crowd? Sure, if family was present and at risk, but, to protect strangers? Against folks armed with assault rifles?

I just wonder how realistic that scenario really would be.

I took a class from "the polite society" folks. They had a bit of a different take on this type of scenario. Essentially, make a list of folks you're willing to die for. Something happens, you could intercede, but, no one on the list? Then don't.

I still wonder about this:

http://fox13now.com/2015/10/29/father-alleged-burglar-dead-after-shootout-in-millcreek/

Interesting thoughts on mass shooting and people armed:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/umpqua-student-with-concealed-weapon-swat-team-wouldve-thought-we-were-bad-guys-if-we-acted/

But, if you are denied "the right"...what country would you move to? Canada? Mexico? Just curious what you think would be a great place for you.

Or, maybe you would just choose not to live?

I guess I'm trying to understand the depth of your statement.

[oldno7]

Or, are you waiting for some credible source to figure it out for you?

Rest assured that wouldn't be you:roflol:

Your progressive mind is made up as is my conservative one--no sense in re-hashing...

[accadacca]

I like.

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/10/2e595240b4f857c6461249dc4520a876.jpg

From my Facebook feed: "Ladies....if you are out and about shopping. Please think about protecting yourself. This concealed carry CAMI is very comfortable, affordable, and easily worn under most clothing...you can purchase these most anywhere that sales outdoor and sporting goods....Academy Sports, Walmart, Outdoor World, and so on. Yes, you must have a CCL to carry this way....if you ate fixed for funds or awaiting to purchase a handgun, stun guns are a workable option.."

[Iceaxe]

^^^ The holster needs to be on the left side.

[accadacca]

^^^ The holster needs to be on the left side.

Well...maybe she is left handed.

[oldno7]

Police chiefs starting to call for citizens to arm themselves.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POLICE_CHIEF_CALL_TO_ARMS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-12-09-17-42-18

[Iceaxe]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnoFKskvSq4

[oldno7]

https://www.facebook.com/Oversight/videos/10153418211287517/

Due process?

[Iceaxe]

^^^she was owned^^^

Best comment "she obviously earned her way to the top on her bach"

[oldno7]

,.,.,

[Iceaxe]

White House Can’t Name A Mass Shooting That Would Have Been Prevented By Gun Control Legislation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y06ED18qxbY

[Sombeech]

https://www.facebook.com/Oversight/videos/10153418211287517/

Due process?

I love the attempt she makes with her facial expression to make it seem like a ridiculous question, then she gets shown in front of the whole world that the 2nd amendment is the only right with this frame of mind.

Trey Gowdy is the man, he gets the facts and won't let anybody budge an inch when trying to ignore or attempt to twist his question.

[accadacca]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/12/d7d8fabff1b1bafe2fa8dd1f97b821cf.jpg

[accadacca]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/20/4d04df2fe790f06e6651908f7d0d49fc.jpg

[accadacca]

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xlp1/t31.0-8/12493739_10153729277406163_3230176424826714840_o.j pg

[Scott P]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/20/4d04df2fe790f06e6651908f7d0d49fc.jpg

Apparently it really wasn't really in the 1950's Sears Catalog. The Daisy airguns pictured didn't exist in the 1950's. Perhaps more interesting, it is actually an ad in the 1966 Boy's Life Magazine:

http://www.snopes.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/daisy-christmas-ad-795x1024.jpg

[rockgremlin]

Wow! Mr. Rogers' wife is hot!

I'm assuming this is an ad for airguns, right? Or is the ad for hunting rifles? I thought Daisy only made airguns (pellet guns and B.B. guns and such).

[Scott P]

Yes, airguns.

[rockgremlin]

https://www.facebook.com/Oversight/videos/10153418211287517/

Due process?

LOL. She got humiliated.

Trey Gowdy for president!

[Iceaxe]

One thing I have never understood is why our government doesn't listen to the experts on firearms when it comes to addressing the problem?

For anyone that is interested here is the the NRA's view of commonsense gun laws. It's worth hearing their views direct from the horse's mouth, or the other end of the horse, depending on your view. But either way their comments in the video have not been manipulated by the media to fit an agenda.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLTMkg1RLW0

[Scott Card]

I liked the line about the solution is not in casting a bigger net but tightening the holes in the net. Makes sense. Laws are of no value when not enforced. Data bases are of no value if they contain insufficient data.

One question I have is if any of the shooters identified in the video would have been prohibited from purchasing a gun under the current laws? Were any of them convicted felons or judicially deemed dangerous or mentally unstable to a point of being dangerous? That was the one big hole in the video for me.

[Sombeech]

One thing I have never understood is why our government doesn't listen to the experts on firearms when it comes to addressing the problem?

For anyone that is interested here is the the NRA's view of commonsense gun laws. It's worth hearing their views direct from the horse's mouth, or the other end of the horse, depending on your view. But either way their comments in the video have not been manipulated by the media to fit an agenda.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLTMkg1RLW0

Screw the expert's factual statements, I'd rather listen to Whoopi huff and puff and flail her arms around like a jackass

[Iceaxe]

This must be an error.... Obama told me this doesn't happen in other countries.

4 dead after shootings in northern Saskatchewanhttp://www.ksl.com/?sid=38238027&nid=235&title=4-dead-after-shootings-in-northern-saskatchewan&s_cid=queue-7

:bert:

[rockgremlin]

Saskatchewan? Noooo...that cannot be. Guns are illegal in Canada!

Must be a typo...

[Iceaxe]

I feel lied to... Obama told me this doesn't happen in other countries.

Gunmen shoot boxing fans at Dublin hotelhttp://www.timesdaily.com/news/nation/gunmen-shoot-boxing-fans-at-dublin-hotel-dead-wounded/article_9101dc86-d576-50e8-b5c3-077467eb374e.html

:bert:

[Iceaxe]

I think it would matter what your intentions and objectives were. Assault weapons, semi-auto pistols and high capacity magazines are all fun and games until you want to get some serious work done.

Just as a frame of reference.... probably the most feared individual soldier on the battlefield is a sniper, which is little more than a guy with a scoped hunting rifle. And I have some serious optics and long range rifles. One of these days a couple of these nut jobs are going to figure out they can do a lot more damage from a distance and escape to do it again. Right now these shootings are all smash and grab copycat type events. But eventually one of the nut cases will learn you can reach out and touch someone from long distance and live to do it another day, and on that day we'll have some real issues.
Called it!