Guess we'll never, ever fix our gun problem
ParticleMan said:
True. But the NRA and other anti-government groups have scared people into equating background checks and waiting periods with ATF raids and gun roundups.
Yes, that is true. But these are not "otherwise decent" people or any such thing. The Randy Weavers of this country were de facto card-carrying Klansmen long before they learned what "ATF" stood for.
Coneheads said:
ParticleMan said:Yes, that is true. But these are not "otherwise decent" people or any such thing. The Randy Weavers of this country were de facto card-carrying Klansmen long before they learned what "ATF" stood for.
True. But the NRA and other anti-government groups have scared people into equating background checks and waiting periods with ATF raids and gun roundups.
But the Randy Weavers of the world are not the ones that give the NRA its power. There are plenty of good people living South and West of here who would be open to some level of gun regulation. The problem is that any regulation is treated as a slippery slope by those with a vested interest in keeping the country armed and dangerous.
I'm of the mind that any sensible gun regulation is going to have to come from a conservative Republican in a safe district. Nothing proposed by a Democrat would ever fly, and anyone but a dyed-in-the-wool conservative would be chased out of office as a RINO.
Red_Barchetta said:
You're right. Short of someone on the other side of the fence being killed (Wayne lapierres wife, Clarence Thomas' grandson, Rick perrys daughter), nothing will happen.
I was thinking the same thing.
Lately, I keep hearing the phrase "sitting duck," as in, "I'm not gonna be some g-damn sitting duck, that's why I carry." As if people are walking around looking to shoot up people 24/7 and anyone can be shot at any time.
ParticleMan said:
he problem is that any regulation is treated as a slippery slope by those with a vested interest in keeping the country armed and dangerous.
The gun makers give the NRA the idea that all regulations are bad. The gun makers don't want the country armed and dangerous. They don't care about that. They just want the guns to sell.
Tom_Reingold said:
ParticleMan said:
he problem is that any regulation is treated as a slippery slope by those with a vested interest in keeping the country armed and dangerous.
The gun makers give the NRA the idea that all regulations are bad. The gun makers don't want the country armed and dangerous. They don't care about that. They just want the guns to sell.
Well, armed is dangerous. And they have an interest in people being armed.
The US owns more guns per capita than any other country - beating out Serbia and Yemen by a large margin. So why do we have more guns than countries who have actually been at war? Because we have a large portion of our society who have been brainwashed into thinking that they are at war.
The NRA, via FOX News, is feeding them a daily dose of white-fear. "The country you love has been stolen by a black, muslim interloper", "Prepare to take back your government", "Black people are taking over your suburbs", "Brown people are taking over your jobs", ect....
Imagine listening to this racial-biased reporting day after day.
Imagine someone with a mental illness (possibly untreated) fed on FOX News, fringe websites and message boards.
And, now imagine them with access to a gun.
And now they're actually being told those same people are trying to TAKE AWAY THE GUNS. So not only do you need to be armed, but you need to sleep cradling your rifle because the black Muslim interloper is going to bust through the door and take it out of your hands.
TarheelsInNj said:
And now they're actually being told those same people are trying to TAKE AWAY THE GUNS. So not only do you need to be armed, but you need to sleep cradling your rifle because the black Muslim interloper is going to bust through the door and take it out of your hands.
This about sizes it up. Funny. Obama never said he would take away guns.
He said this: "We're a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We've got a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect themselves. My belief is that we have to enforce the laws we've already got, make sure that we're keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We've done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we've got more to do when it comes to enforcement. But weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there's an awful lot of violence and they're not using AK-47s. They're using cheap hand guns." – Presidential debate, Oct. 16, 2012.
And this - much to @woot's point:
"The United States does not have a monopoly on crazy people. It's not the only country that has psychosis. And yet we kill each other in these mass shootings at rates that are exponentially higher than anyone else. Well, what's the difference? The difference is that these guys can stack up a bunch of ammunition in their houses, and that's sort of par for the course."
You're not suggesting they listen to what Obama actually says, are you? They only listen to what Fox News says he says
Unfortunately, there's a real dearth of pols willing to say anything about gun control. How did we come to this.
Woot said: "And about 30,000 people die at the hands of a gun every day."
Surely a longer period than that??
ParticleMan said: "I'm of the mind that any sensible gun
regulation is going to have to come from a conservative Republican in a
safe district. Nothing proposed by a Democrat would ever fly, and anyone
but a dyed-in-the-wool conservative would be chased out of office as a
RINO."
Could well be true. Never thought I'd say this, but where is Barry Goldwater when you need him? Surely he'd see the difference between a shotgun or "regular" pistol and some of the stuff that's out there now, and god help anyone who said he wasn't conservative.
Woot, sadly I knew you meant every year, and the most recent complete count from 2011 is 32,251. This year, guns will likely surpass cars as the leading mechanical cause of death.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/01/americas-top-killing-machine/384440/
So that's 11 9-11's every year. And most gun deaths of course aren't mass slaughters. They're suicides. There's no easier way to kill yourself, and since suicide is an extremely impulsive act, that's at least 21,000 people, many young, who would almost certainly not die every year. Add to the entire picture our Nation's abysmal mental health system, and the horrific toll of unfettered gun access is clear.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/14/many-more-people-are-dying-from-gun-suicides-than-homicides/
The NRA is the lobbying arm of the firearms industry. They aren't the least bit concerned about defending 2nd Amendment rights. Maximizing gun sales is their only goal. Depending which poll you look at at least 80% of NRA members support universal background checks.
http://dailykos.com/story/2013/07/04/1220978/-The-real-reason-the-NRA-opposes-background-checks-with-poll
This stretches back to the late 70's, when the fear of Federal siezures became a concern of a faction within the NRA. This led to the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, which unintentionally took decisions on restoring convicted felons' right to carry away from the ATF and left it to the states. When this was discovered, rather than helping plug the loophole, the NRA told a Republican sponsor where to stick it. Over 3,000 violent felons have had those rights restored.
http://nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us/felons-finding-it-easy-to-regain-gun-rights.html
Add the prohibition in that legislation from creating a centralized record of gun sales, which remain on paper to this day, and severe limits on shutting the very few dealers cobducting most of the illegal sales, and the fact the NRA doesn't care if we have 100 Sandy Hooks a day.
http://nytimes.com/2012/12/26/us/legislative-handcuffs-limit-atfs-ability-to-fight-gun-crime.html
Their answer is to continue the lie that gun siezures or ammo limits are coming, which began before Obama's inauguration, and their sucess in driving gun sales through the roof is clear. The NRA's notion that enforcing existing laws would have any effect is false. Thanks to them, those laws put guns in the hands of violent felons and the mentally ill, and make it impossible for law enforcement to trace guns used in crimes or shut criminal dealers. They and the cowardly legislators they've bought have an enormous amount of blood on their hands, and are the reason we continue to stand alone among developed nations in death by guns.
mjc said:
Woot said: "And about 30,000 people die at the hands of a gun every day."
Surely a longer period than that??
ParticleMan said: "I'm of the mind that any sensible gun
regulation is going to have to come from a conservative Republican in a
safe district. Nothing proposed by a Democrat would ever fly, and anyone
but a dyed-in-the-wool conservative would be chased out of office as a
RINO."
Could well be true. Never thought I'd say this, but where is Barry Goldwater when you need him? Surely he'd see the difference between a shotgun or "regular" pistol and some of the stuff that's out there now, and god help anyone who said he wasn't conservative.
Sorry - Clearly a typo, borne out of my frustration with gun rights advocates. About 30,000 per year die at the hands of a gun.
dk50b said:
Woot, sadly I knew you meant every year, and the most recent complete count from 2011 is 32,251. This year, guns will likely surpass cars as the leading mechanical cause of death.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/01/americas-top-killing-machine/384440/
So that's 11 9-11's every year. And most gun deaths of course aren't mass slaughters. They're suicides. There's no easier way to kill yourself, and since suicide is an extremely impulsive act, that's at least 21,000 people, many young, who would almost certainly not die every year. Add to the entire picture our Nation's abysmal mental health system, and the horrific toll of unfettered gun access is clear.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/14/many-more-people-are-dying-from-gun-suicides-than-homicides/
The NRA is the lobbying arm of the firearms industry. They aren't the least bit concerned about defending 2nd Amendment rights. Maximizing gun sales is their only goal. Depending which poll you look at at least 80% of NRA members support universal background checks.
http://dailykos.com/story/2013/07/04/1220978/-The-real-reason-the-NRA-opposes-background-checks-with-poll
This stretches back to the late 70's, when the fear of Federal siezures became a concern of a faction within the NRA. This led to the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, which unintentionally took decisions on restoring convicted felons' right to carry away from the ATF and left it to the states. When this was discovered, rather than helping plug the loophole, the NRA told a Republican sponsor where to stick it. Over 3,000 violent felons have had those rights restored.
http://nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us/felons-finding-it-easy-to-regain-gun-rights.html
Add the prohibition in that legislation from creating a centralized record of gun sales, which remain on paper to this day, and severe limits on shutting the very few dealers cobducting most of the illegal sales, and the fact the NRA doesn't care if we have 100 Sandy Hooks a day.
http://nytimes.com/2012/12/26/us/legislative-handcuffs-limit-atfs-ability-to-fight-gun-crime.html
Their answer is to continue the lie that gun siezures or ammo limits are coming, which began before Obama's inauguration, and their sucess in driving gun sales through the roof is clear. The NRA's notion that enforcing existing laws would have any effect is false. Thanks to them, those laws put guns in the hands of violent felons and the mentally ill, and make it impossible for law enforcement to trace guns used in crimes or shut criminal dealers. They and the cowardly legislators they've bought have an enormous amount of blood on their hands, and are the reason we continue to stand alone among developed nations in death by guns.
Thank you. And I fully agree with everything you wrote.
mjc said:
Woot said: "And about 30,000 people die at the hands of a gun every day."
Surely a longer period than that??
ParticleMan said: "I'm of the mind that any sensible gun
regulation is going to have to come from a conservative Republican in a
safe district. Nothing proposed by a Democrat would ever fly, and anyone
but a dyed-in-the-wool conservative would be chased out of office as a
RINO."
Could well be true. Never thought I'd say this, but where is Barry Goldwater when you need him? Surely he'd see the difference between a shotgun or "regular" pistol and some of the stuff that's out there now, and god help anyone who said he wasn't conservative.
And the US has no need for "regular" pistols either. Most of the 30,000+ annual deaths aren't semiautomatic slaughters in schools. They are a pistol to the head (50+ per day), gun shot in argument or crime (20+ per day), or accidental (rare but several per day).
It is a national embarrassment.
When the GOP debate premieres, I'll bet $20 bucks that no one will bring up gun control. If asked, they will gloss over the topic. They want that lobby money more than they want Americans to live. Fascinating.
kibbegirl said:
When the GOP debate premieres, I'll bet $20 bucks that no one will bring up gun control. If asked, they will gloss over the topic. They want that lobby money more than they want Americans to live. Fascinating.
Once you make a deal with the devil, or the NRA, you pay with your political life if you back out. The NRA will ensure anyone not keeping the death industry unregulated will be out of office at the next election. So yes it's the most deadly form of cowardice, but what politician would knowingly end their career to do what's right?
apologies to Woot - I knew it was just a typo, but wasn't sure the 30K was an annual figure.
Horrible all around, and in addition to dk50b's rundown of appalling facts (unless I overlooked this in the post): government is forbidden even to study gun deaths, beyond the FBI collecting raw data. eg:
http://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-nra-kills-gun-violence-research-2013-1
The NRA spends $1.8 billion/year on lobbying. Only a group of billionaires could match that, and be willing to use their fortune for a good cause. There's no industry who will fund gun control Iobbying, so I can't think of any other possible way.
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000000082
Many are now saying since any new gun regulation won't happen, which I agree is impossible under the current situation, the focus should shift to mental health. This is equally hopeless. Our ability to identify those who are a danger to themselves and others is pitifully lacking. And even those who get flagged as a danger still easily buy guns.
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/96ja6e/the-nightly-show-evil-plus----enough-already
I thought Mike Bloomberg was going to make gun control the focus of his post-mayoral years. What happened to that?
Now here's a gun/hunting story you don't hear every day...and it happened twice!
An East Texas man was hospitalized early Thursday morning after a bullet he fired at an armadillo ricocheted back at his head, KLTV reported.
The man shot at the armadillo just before 3 a.m. on Thursday after seeing it on the freeway in the town of Marietta, Texas, according to Cass County Sheriff official.
The bullet ricocheted back at his head. The man was treated for minor injuries. Local reports are unclear as to the condition of the armadillo.
This was the second armadillo-shooting-followed-by-ricochet of the year. The first, in Georgia in April, injured the shooter’s mother-in-law. The man shot the armadillo, the bullet bounced and then passed through a fence and into her mobile home while she sat in a recliner. Her injuries were minor but the armadillo did not survive.
TPM
Serious and non-leading question.... The Reps get blasted over this ad nauseum, and not without reason. The Dems, however, have been able to decry the current situation while at the same time actually do little else. They fought and won the battle over healthcare, but what prevented a similar attack on gun control these last 7 years? Can't be the lobby money given the insurance lobby cashflows. Did they only have it in them for one issue, not two?
dk50b said:
Woot, sadly I knew you meant every year, and the most recent complete count from 2011 is 32,251. This year, guns will likely surpass cars as the leading mechanical cause of death.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/01/americas-top-killing-machine/384440/
So that's 11 9-11's every year. And most gun deaths of course aren't mass slaughters. They're suicides. There's no easier way to kill yourself, and since suicide is an extremely impulsive act, that's at least 21,000 people, many young, who would almost certainly not die every year. Add to the entire picture our Nation's abysmal mental health system, and the horrific toll of unfettered gun access is clear.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/14/many-more-people-are-dying-from-gun-suicides-than-homicides/
The NRA is the lobbying arm of the firearms industry. They aren't the least bit concerned about defending 2nd Amendment rights. Maximizing gun sales is their only goal. Depending which poll you look at at least 80% of NRA members support universal background checks.
http://dailykos.com/story/2013/07/04/1220978/-The-real-reason-the-NRA-opposes-background-checks-with-poll
This stretches back to the late 70's, when the fear of Federal siezures became a concern of a faction within the NRA. This led to the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, which unintentionally took decisions on restoring convicted felons' right to carry away from the ATF and left it to the states. When this was discovered, rather than helping plug the loophole, the NRA told a Republican sponsor where to stick it. Over 3,000 violent felons have had those rights restored.
http://nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us/felons-finding-it-easy-to-regain-gun-rights.html
Add the prohibition in that legislation from creating a centralized record of gun sales, which remain on paper to this day, and severe limits on shutting the very few dealers cobducting most of the illegal sales, and the fact the NRA doesn't care if we have 100 Sandy Hooks a day.
http://nytimes.com/2012/12/26/us/legislative-handcuffs-limit-atfs-ability-to-fight-gun-crime.html
Their answer is to continue the lie that gun siezures or ammo limits are coming, which began before Obama's inauguration, and their sucess in driving gun sales through the roof is clear. The NRA's notion that enforcing existing laws would have any effect is false. Thanks to them, those laws put guns in the hands of violent felons and the mentally ill, and make it impossible for law enforcement to trace guns used in crimes or shut criminal dealers. They and the cowardly legislators they've bought have an enormous amount of blood on their hands, and are the reason we continue to stand alone among developed nations in death by guns.
So you're in the camp that felons should remain felons for the rest of their lives then
shoshannah said:
I thought Mike Bloomberg was going to make gun control the focus of his post-mayoral years. What happened to that?
I was hoping he would spend maybe $10B of his own money and buy stock in gun companies- then change them from within. He would have to be stealth about it and there are ways it could fail, but it's a nice thought.
GL2 said:
Now here's a gun/hunting story you don't hear every day...and it happened twice!
An East Texas man was hospitalized early Thursday morning after a bullet he fired at an armadillo ricocheted back at his head, KLTV reported.
The man shot at the armadillo just before 3 a.m. on Thursday after seeing it on the freeway in the town of Marietta, Texas, according to Cass County Sheriff official.
The bullet ricocheted back at his head. The man was treated for minor injuries. Local reports are unclear as to the condition of the armadillo.
This was the second armadillo-shooting-followed-by-ricochet of the year. The first, in Georgia in April, injured the shooter’s mother-in-law. The man shot the armadillo, the bullet bounced and then passed through a fence and into her mobile home while she sat in a recliner. Her injuries were minor but the armadillo did not survive.
TPM
I'm wondering who paid for that Texas man's hospital bill.
ctrzaska said:
Serious and non-leading question.... The Reps get blasted over this ad nauseum, and not without reason. The Dems, however, have been able to decry the current situation while at the same time actually do little else. They fought and won the battle over healthcare, but what prevented a similar attack on gun control these last 7 years? Can't be the lobby money given the insurance lobby cashflows. Did they only have it in them for one issue, not two?
Neither national party will touch this third rail if they're thinking about a future in politics. Mayors have shown courage, but that's about it. Needs to be a cultural change. If Newtown didn't do it, maybe nothing will. Given comparisons to other countries, it ain't the laws so much as our happy trigger fingers.
Manufacturers and sellers can both funnel guns into cities and also blame city shooters for their lawlessness in the wild west turf wars of our decaying urban ghettos.
No gang member ever manufactured (except for West Side Story type '50's "zip guns") a gun or made the initial sale. Manufacture - sell - stuff in trunk - drive to Chicago - sell to gangsters - repeat.
Which is right about where I was going to come to in terms of a conclusion. Particularly with regard to Newtown. Hate to be defeatist about it, but it's not a Republican problem or a Dem problem or an NRA problem-- it's a national scourge without political boundaries. And there's little our reps, senators orwe can or will do about it.
ctrzaska said:
Which is right about where I was going to come to in terms of a conclusion. Particularly with regard to Newtown. Hate to be defeatist about it, but it's not a Republican problem or a Dem problem or an NRA problem-- it's a national scourge without political boundaries. And there's little our reps, senators orwe can or will do about it.
Putting aside, for a moment, the partisan party thing:
The NRA don't vote.
Its membership votes for a Board of Governors (or directors, or whatever they're called). Join the NRA. Get a few million like minded friends to do the same. Elect a Board of Governors that will do your bidding.
Easy.
Our Congressmen?
The NRA don't vote.
We do. (Or at least some of us do. Sometimes).
WE are the people that elected the people you assert: can't; or won't, do anything.
To my view, you make it sound like WE screwed the pooch. And perhaps we have. But if that's so, WE did it to ourselves.
Perhaps, just perhaps, it's time for those concerned about the gun laws in New Jersey to stop pissing and moaning about the sorry state of affairs about the Nation, and do something.
On the other hand, some smart guy once told me that until we cure that which ails the human spirit, we ain't gonna make a dent in the body count.
TomR
For Sale
Free Items
Rentals
-
Huge Brand New construction Apartment in 2 family home with 4 bedrooms 3 bathrooms
4 Bd | 3Full Ba
$4,500
Advertisement
Why do you think that is?