Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Canadian_watcher wrote:I am not what you'd call 'pro-gun.' But I am not anti-gun, either. I just don't think that this incident can be twisted to support a "see? armed citizens are dangerous!!!" argument because, like you said Nordic, this guy proves that it isn't the case.
JackRiddler wrote:Canadian_watcher wrote:Listen to the hate against the right in this forum alone, and this isa sort of apolitical/brainy/intuitive/creative crew.
Well, we're all right here on this forum, so there must be a wealth of examples within easy reach. Please show us some!
.
JackRiddler wrote:Only women should ever be allowed to have guns. The death rate from guns, including wars, would drop to a tenth or less (and most of it would still be from men).
Luposapien wrote:JackRiddler wrote:Maybe you think it was coincidental that Giffords was already on Palin's crosshairs map and getting death threats and having her offices vandalized and complaining about it publicly, before an actual assassin appeared and shot her for completely unrelated reasons because he was crazy. I do not. (I also think this is of greater significance in explaining what happened than that someone on the scene was named Dave Bowman, or that the young girl the assassin murdered happened to be born on 9/11/01.)
Just wanted to go on the record that, although I got caught up in the weirdness of all the synchs in this story, I most definitely agree with Jack here. There is a deeply disturbing, and I believe deliberate, pattern of violent rhetoric and imagery directed, to a very large extent, at those perceived to be liberal, progressive, or (heaven forbid) socialist. As much as I'm horrified by what happened, in all honesty, it amazes me that this kind of thing doesn't happen more often than it does. That it happened to a female Democrat in Arizona is entirely unsurprising. This is not to say that I don't see anger and hatred directed at the right by those on the left, because I do, but I don't see it as much, and I don't see it much outside of specifically left-leaning forums. I certainly don't see it much at all in any of the mainstream media.
Also, although my anti-gun sentiments have lessened in recent years, I have to come down on the side of those who say adding more guns to the mix is not really solution to anything.
JackRiddler wrote:stickdog99 wrote:Personally, I'm strongly in favor of vastly expanded gun ownership, but only among those rational and restrained enough not to be strongly in favor of vastly expanded gun ownership.
Only women should ever be allowed to have guns. The death rate from guns, including wars, would drop to a tenth or less (and most of it would still be from men).
.
JackRiddler wrote:Canadian_watcher wrote:I'll give authoritarian, but I'm not so sure about right wing. Obama's running the show right now and I think there have been a few authoritarian moves under his watch.
The Wall-Mart tell on your neighbour messages.
The clamp down at airports.
The idea of an internet ID for all.
Continuation of all the Bush-era denials of civil liberties in spite of promising the contrary...
need I go on?
Obama's running the show? He's on the left? How many false premises are you going to cram into that?
.
justdrew wrote:
how would a gun wielding person know who to shoot? It's highly likely that they'll pick the wrong person, just as HAPPENED in this case, it just so happens he didn't shoot, another person likely would have. Then a third person shows up and shoots him. Round robin. I have zero trust in my fellow Americans, especially those fellow Americans who are so pathetic as to feel the need to carry firearms while running errands around town. It's madness.
undead wrote:
Yeah, where's the hating of the right wing happening on this forum? I mean there's definitely a lot of sarcastic loathing, hand wringing, deconstruction, exposition, analysis, etc. But I don't see any "left" elements hating on anyone. When you comment on fascism, you are commenting on pure hate, so a clear view of that is always going to be really unpleasant.
This might seem hateful, but it really isn't. I don't give a fuck about Gabrielle Giffords or whether she lives or dies. I had never heard of her when this happened and since she supports concentration camps for undocumented immigrants, then karma's a bitch, I guess. Whatever. Lot's of people get killed like this *every day* in Mexico and I care a lot more about them, other innocent people who were killed and wounded, and whatever insane reaction this incident will precipitate from the police state. It is really a shame that this has to happen in order to snap the American public out of their sleepwalking and the sad thing is that I doubt this will be enough.
IanEye wrote:Canadian_watcher wrote:forget abortion (wedge) or guns (wedge)
I'm pretty sure the family of George Tiller won't be forgetting either of those wedges.
Canadian_watcher wrote:But.. that isn't the scene - the scene is the opposite, except nobody sees it, and so they point fingers at each other inot noticing they are deep within a house of mirrors.
Luposapien wrote:JackRiddler wrote:Maybe you think it was coincidental that Giffords was already on Palin's crosshairs map and getting death threats and having her offices vandalized and complaining about it publicly, before an actual assassin appeared and shot her for completely unrelated reasons because he was crazy. I do not. (I also think this is of greater significance in explaining what happened than that someone on the scene was named Dave Bowman, or that the young girl the assassin murdered happened to be born on 9/11/01.)
Just wanted to go on the record that, although I got caught up in the weirdness of all the synchs in this story, I most definitely agree with Jack here. There is a deeply disturbing, and I believe deliberate, pattern of violent rhetoric and imagery directed, to a very large extent, at those perceived to be liberal, progressive, or (heaven forbid) socialist. As much as I'm horrified by what happened, in all honesty, it amazes me that this kind of thing doesn't happen more often than it does. That it happened to a female Democrat in Arizona is entirely unsurprising. This is not to say that I don't see anger and hatred directed at the right by those on the left, because I do, but I don't see it as much, and I don't see it much outside of specifically left-leaning forums. I certainly don't see it much at all in any of the mainstream media.
Also, although my anti-gun sentiments have lessened in recent years, I have to come down on the side of those who say adding more guns to the mix is not really solution to anything.
Simulist wrote:Canadian_watcher wrote:But.. that isn't the scene - the scene is the opposite, except nobody sees it, and so they point fingers at each other inot noticing they are deep within a house of mirrors.
I used to think I was in a hall of mirrors. Now though, I'm starting to think it's the Ronald Reagan Hospital for the Mentally Ill.
Maybe we were spirited away there back in 1980s on a wave of unfounded optimism... Peggy Noonan was the admitting nurse and Dr. C. Everett Koop was the administrator and psychiatrist. James Watt is outside tending to the grounds, and Ethel Merman is still singing "Everything's Coming Up Roses."
(Looks like we picked the wrong decade to go nuts!)
Experts: Gun Background Checks Have Big Gaps
by Laura Sullivan
January 15, 2011
When Jared Loughner walked into the Tucson gun store where authorities allege he put down his money for a Glock 19 in November, the store owner sent a request to run Loughner's name through the FBI's database of criminals, fugitives, illegal immigrants and mentally ill to see if Loughner was among them.
Loughner had had several runs in with police for possessing drugs and had been told to leave his community college for erratic behavior. But the arrests never became convictions, and his behavior was never evaluated by state mental health professionals. So like 10 million others across the U.S. last year, Loughner passed and got his gun.
Despite the outcome, it's not people like Jared Loughner — people who may have questionable but not criminal backgrounds — that have gun control advocates worried. It's the database itself, which is only as good as the records that states put into it...
The database is a 13-year-old system called NICS — the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. It pulls records from not only state and local police but dozens of other agencies, including the U.S. Park Police, campus police and the U.S. Border Patrol...
"If there's an open warrant for someone's arrest, the database is usually correct," said Robert McCrie, professor of security management at the John Hay College of Criminal Justice. "Where it is not correct is in the disposition of cases — if the charges are later dismissed or the case is continued. That's not very reliable, and that's a problem"...
In 2005, the latest figures available, the Justice Department determined that more than 3,000 people walked out of a gun store with a firearm that they should not have been able to buy...
Some of the biggest challenges for the database, experts say, are domestic violence and drug cases, which often have inconclusive ends. Defendants are sometimes given a year or two to attend treatment, complete community service or enter therapy before a court decides whether a conviction will stand. An arrest is not enough to prohibit someone from buying a gun.
In 2009, the FBI ran 10.8 million background checks on potential customers. About 150,000 people were rejected. Most had felony or domestic violence convictions, or a restraining order, on their records. Less than 2 percent were rejected because of a mental illness.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 180 guests