It's time!

[bigrebnc1775]

Isn't it time for a rational discussion on gun control?

After watching/listening to the NRA's response to Sandy Hook even many gun enthusiasts were appalled and embarrassed by LaPierre's 'news' conference.

Rational people know that no effort to "take away our guns" is in the offing nor is such a plan viable. Rational people also know that some form of gun control is necessary and the debate should be framed by what would be sufficient.

Every rational person wants an end to gun violence, but too much time is wasted defending the Second Amendment which is NOT under general assault.

It's time, too many innocent men, women and children have died, a death directly related to the trauma of a gun shot; if you're not part of the solution, you are a large part of the problem.

Those "RATIONAL" people you seem to place on a pedestal are the same people who got us all those school gun shootings by creating all those gun free zones.

Thank you for as rational a response as one might expect from a parrot.

"So, we need to a accept that guns and mass murder are part of our culture and Sandy Hook is simply one price we pay for freedom. The Congress and the NRA and you have known and accepted this for years. So, lets all step over the bodiles and quit crying as if death is something special; it is a normal and expected occurrence - like earthquakes and hurricanes, tornadoes and floods - and we do nothing to protect us from these events - don't we?"

Above also posted by Wry on the thread: "other than?"

Clinton's assault weapons ban has proven that assault weapons ban do not work.
Gun control does not work Sandy Hook and many other places like it have prove that
Gun free zones do not work Auroa has proven that
So let's keep doing what we have been doing and think things will be different this time.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Those "RATIONAL" people you seem to place on a pedestal are the same people who got us all those school gun shootings by creating all those gun free zones.

Thank you for as rational a response as one might expect from a parrot.

"So, we need to a accept that guns and mass murder are part of our culture and Sandy Hook is simply one price we pay for freedom. The Congress and the NRA and you have known and accepted this for years. So, lets all step over the bodiles and quit crying as if death is something special; it is a normal and expected occurrence - like earthquakes and hurricanes, tornadoes and floods - and we do nothing to protect us from these events - don't we?"

Above also posted by Wry on the thread: "other than?"

Clinton's assault weapons ban has proven that assault weapons ban do not work.
Prove this statement.

Gun control does not work Sandy Hook and many other places like it have prove that
Prove this statement

Gun free zones do not work Auroa has proven that
Prove adding criminal penalties has never prevented someone from taking a gun into a gun free area

So let's keep doing what we have been doing and think things will be different this time.

As I suggested, we will continue to do the same thing over and over and expect nothing will change, those of us who believe our society would be safer with some gun controls - not absolute banishment - need to accept the fact that innocent lives will be taken because people like you put guns on a pedestal; I will continue to exercise my right and post current events from around the nation wherein a gun took a life.

You may also post current events wherein someone saved a life by using or brandishing a firearm.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Thank you for as rational a response as one might expect from a parrot.

"So, we need to a accept that guns and mass murder are part of our culture and Sandy Hook is simply one price we pay for freedom. The Congress and the NRA and you have known and accepted this for years. So, lets all step over the bodiles and quit crying as if death is something special; it is a normal and expected occurrence - like earthquakes and hurricanes, tornadoes and floods - and we do nothing to protect us from these events - don't we?"

Above also posted by Wry on the thread: "other than?"

Clinton's assault weapons ban has proven that assault weapons ban do not work.
Prove this statement.
There was a number of school schootingduring clintons assault weapons ban
Gun control does not work Sandy Hook and many other places like it have prove that
Prove this statement
Re-read my comment isn't the latest shooting proof enough?
Gun free zones do not work Auroa has proven that
Prove adding criminal penalties has never prevented someone from taking a gun into a gun free area
How many mass shootings happen in gun free zones?

So let's keep doing what we have been doing and think things will be different this time.

As I suggested, we will and those of us who believe our society would be safer with some gun controls - not absolute banishment - need to accept the fact that innocent lives will be taken because people like you put guns on a pedestal; but I will continue to exercise my right and post current events from around the nation wherein a gun took a life.

You may also post current events wherein someone saved a life by using or brandishing a firearm.

There you have it.

 

[Ernie S.]

Isn't it time for a rational discussion on gun control?

After watching/listening to the NRA's response to Sandy Hook even many gun enthusiasts were appalled and embarrassed by LaPierre's 'news' conference.

Rational people know that no effort to "take away our guns" is in the offing nor is such a plan viable. Rational people also know that some form of gun control is necessary and the debate should be framed by what would be sufficient.

Every rational person wants an end to gun violence, but too much time is wasted defending the Second Amendment which is NOT under general assault.

It's time, too many innocent men, women and children have died, a death directly related to the trauma of a gun shot; if you're not part of the solution, you are a large part of the problem.

Those "RATIONAL" people you seem to place on a pedestal are the same people who got us all those school gun shootings by creating all those gun free zones.

Thank you for as rational a response as one might expect from a parrot.

"So, we need to a accept that guns and mass murder are part of our culture and Sandy Hook is simply one price we pay for freedom. The Congress and the NRA and you have known and accepted this for years. So, lets all step over the bodiles and quit crying as if death is something special; it is a normal and expected occurrence - like earthquakes and hurricanes, tornadoes and floods - and we do nothing to protect us from these events - don't we?"

Above also posted by Wry on the thread: "other than?"

Yes. Unfortunately, guns and mass murder are part of our culture. So are Constitutionally protected rights. So is a mentality that a certain segment of the population is entitled to the fruits of the labor of others and can take what they haven't worked for by force. What is disappearing from our culture is respect for the rights of the respectable.
There are 80 million gun owners in the US and last year there were about 14,500 murders. Lets say that in 75% of those murders, a gun was used. That means that 99.9985% of gun owners did not kill anyone.
While any 6 year old's death is horrible, the SHES shooting amounted to 20 kids. That's less than the number of kids that drown in back yard swimming pools in Miami every year, less that those that die from swallowing poisons or home cleaning agents, less than die in house fires, of cancer, of infected sores, of rubella, the flu or because their mother used illegal drugs during her pregnancy.
Yet, these 20 are somehow "extra" special. Why? Because the just happened to die in a class room?
One young man is responsible. Not Bushmaster, not Remington, not Glock, not Wayne Lapierre, the second amendment or the seventy nine million nine hundred and ninety nine thousand nine hundred and ninety nine people that didn't shoot up a school that day.
We don't need no stinkin' new rules. It's already against the law for felons, wife beaters and crazy people to own guns. It was illegal for this kid to possess a gun in a school building, to fire one within 100 feet of an inhabited building or road, to use a firearm as a means to illegally enter a building and to kill children and staff. The hundreds of laws already in place did not save one of those 20 6 year olds.
What good will one more law do other than infringe the rights of those seventy nine million nine hundred and ninety nine thousand nine hundred and ninety nine gun owners that listened to the TV or radio with at least as much horror as you did, when they heard the news?

 

[Ernie S.]

Snip

Gun free zones do not work Auroa has proven that
Prove adding criminal penalties has never prevented someone from taking a gun into a gun free area
/snip

Adding criminal penalties only prevented the people who wouldn't shoot 6 year olds, but may have been able to save some, from entering a gun free zone.

 

[Wry Catcher]

JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday, rejecting claims by America's top gun lobby that Israel serves as proof for its philosophy that the U.S. needs more weapons, not fewer.

"Far from the image of a heavily armed population where ordinary people have their own arsenals to repel attackers, Israel allows its people to acquire firearms only if they can prove their professions or places of residence put them in danger. The country relies on its security services, not armed citizens, to prevent terror attacks."

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

 

[bayoubill]

JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday, rejecting claims by America's top gun lobby that Israel serves as proof for its philosophy that the U.S. needs more weapons, not fewer.

"Far from the image of a heavily armed population where ordinary people have their own arsenals to repel attackers, Israel allows its people to acquire firearms only if they can prove their professions or places of residence put them in danger. The country relies on its security services, not armed citizens, to prevent terror attacks."

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

no surprise... I'm a long-time member of the NRA... and I have no faith in anything that comes outta dumb-**** LaPierre's mouth...

 

[boedicca]

Israel allows its people to acquire firearms only if they can prove their professions or places of residence put them in danger. The country relies on its security services, not armed citizens, to prevent terror attacks.

Considering the location of Israeli, the first sentence applies to almost every citizen in that country. As for the latter, they rely on security services, which is exactly what the NRA has recommended for schools.

If it's good enough to protect shopping malls, the White House, and airports, it should be good enough to protect innocent children.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday, rejecting claims by America's top gun lobby that Israel serves as proof for its philosophy that the U.S. needs more weapons, not fewer.

"Far from the image of a heavily armed population where ordinary people have their own arsenals to repel attackers, Israel allows its people to acquire firearms only if they can prove their professions or places of residence put them in danger. The country relies on its security services, not armed citizens, to prevent terror attacks."

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

It’s idiocy to compare the United States and its gun laws/issues to that of Israel or any other Western nation.

 

[bayoubill]

In any discussion of rights to arms, there's no shortage of idiots on either side of the debate...

 

[regnum_defundie]

Why all the absolute hate for the NRA while ignoring the drug companies who, like Eli Lilly, hook millions of people into drugs they don't need and might actually be responsible for making kids shoot kids?

The NRA didn't force Adam Lanza to pick up a gun and shoot. They didn't drive him to the school.

Witness Eli Lilly:

Eli Lilly to settle US SEC bribery case
December 21 2012 at 10:12am By Reuters

US drugmaker Eli Lilly and Co agreed on Thursday to pay $29 million to settle civil charges that its subsidiaries made improper payments to foreign government officials to win business in Russia, Brazil, China and Poland.

Lilly's settlement with the US Securities and Exchange Commission represents part of a broader bribery crackdown on the pharmaceutical industry by US criminal and civil authorities as they continue to probe corruption.

The settlement stems from an investigation by the SEC of Lilly's activities from 1994 to 2009, Lilly said, adding the company was first notified of the probe in 2003.

In this case, the SEC alleged that a Russian unit of Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly used “marketing agreements” to funnel millions of dollars to government officials through offshore companies.

iol DOT co DOT za/business/international/eli-lilly-to-settle-us-sec-bribery-case-1.1444006

In 2006 Eli Lilly got caught for encouraging primary care physicians to use Zyprexa, a powerful drug for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, in patients who did not have either condition.

******PROMOTING THE USE OF A DRUG IN THE MIDDLE OF A DRUG WAR TO PATIENTS WHO DID NOT HAVE EITHER CONDITION*****************************************

But wait- there's more:

ANOTHER criminal information alleged that Zyprexa was promoted (1999-2003) in nursing homes and assisted-living facilities for the treatment of disorders such as dementia, Alzheimer’s dementia, depression, anxiety, and sleep problems, and behavioral symptoms such as agitation, aggression, and hostility. The qui tam lawsuits alleged that Zyprexa was promoted (1999-2005) for use in patients of all ages and for the treatment of anxiety, irritability, depression, nausea, Alzheimer’s and other mood disorders. Off-label promotion of pharmaceutical drugs is considered, by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to be a serious crime that undermines their role in drug regulation and public safety

Olanzapine - Wikipedia

Michael Moore: Is it the Drugs and not the Guns?
youtube DOT com/watch?v=DpinCRaAQOk

There is no doubt anymore. It *is* the DRUGS and Not the guns.

 

[9thIDdoc]

"JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday"

Gosh...I wonder what "experts" think a terrorist is? Stupid comment.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday"

Gosh...I wonder what "experts" think a terrorist is? Stupid comment.

Your use of the word "terrorist" is more expansive than most of us believe. I doubt any political motive existed in the troubled mind of the shooters in our four most recent mass murders (Arizona, Colorado, Washington and Connecticut) nor were they (apparently) religious zealots (like Roeder, Rudolph) or revolutionary crackpots like the far left three decades ago (SLA, Weatherman).

 

[Mad Scientist]

The policy is designed to stop Terrorists but as a side benefit, also stops Crazed Gunmen?

Sounds like an exercise in Semantics.

 

[Cassandro]

JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday, rejecting claims by America's top gun lobby that Israel serves as proof for its philosophy that the U.S. needs more weapons, not fewer.

"Far from the image of a heavily armed population where ordinary people have their own arsenals to repel attackers, Israel allows its people to acquire firearms only if they can prove their professions or places of residence put them in danger. The country relies on its security services, not armed citizens, to prevent terror attacks."

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

I am constantly perplexed by Libtard Propaganda: Do they knowingly promote false or misleading information, or are they simply surrounded with "like-minded" individuals who never question the party line? This thread is just another example evading the relevant issue of armed guards at schools and focusing on irrelevant word-mincing about whether the primary purpose of Israeli security is to stop terrorists as opposed to crazed gunmen, and deceptively suggests that the NRA simply believes "the U.S. needs more weapons."

 

[Wry Catcher]

JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday, rejecting claims by America's top gun lobby that Israel serves as proof for its philosophy that the U.S. needs more weapons, not fewer.

"Far from the image of a heavily armed population where ordinary people have their own arsenals to repel attackers, Israel allows its people to acquire firearms only if they can prove their professions or places of residence put them in danger. The country relies on its security services, not armed citizens, to prevent terror attacks."

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

I am constantly perplexed by Libtard Propaganda: Do they knowingly promote false or misleading information, or are they simply surrounded with "like-minded" individuals who never question the party line? This thread is just another example evading the relevant issue of armed guards at schools and focusing on irrelevant word-mincing about whether the primary purpose of Israeli security is to stop terrorists as opposed to crazed gunmen, and deceptively suggests that the NRA simply believes "the U.S. needs more weapons."

No, the thread was none of those things nor was it an effort to evade the issue of armed guards at schools.
1. Arming guards at every school in America is 1) very expensive; 2) loaded with risk and unless private schools are subsidized, puts them at risk.
2. A lone gunman is impossible to stop unless the armed guard is at the right spot at the right time, is equally armed and protected and most importantly cares not if s/he lives or dies.
3. Arming guards in the numbers needed is a great opportunity for gun makers, ammo suppliers, range masters and such to profit - those are whom the NRA wants to protect.
4. The GOP wants to privatize health care. First by gutting/repealing Obamacare and then by gutting Medicare, Medicaid and SSI. Yet, the NRA expects more treatment for mental health.
5. Bullets kill people, some are the targets and some are not - does anyone want a gun fight on a school campus pitting high velocity high capacity guns vis a vis other high velocity high capacity guns?

 

[9thIDdoc]

"It costs too much" is still not an acceptable response.

 

[mudwhistle]

JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday, rejecting claims by America's top gun lobby that Israel serves as proof for its philosophy that the U.S. needs more weapons, not fewer.

"Far from the image of a heavily armed population where ordinary people have their own arsenals to repel attackers, Israel allows its people to acquire firearms only if they can prove their professions or places of residence put them in danger. The country relies on its security services, not armed citizens, to prevent terror attacks."

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

What's the difference between a terrorist and a crazed and disgruntled gunman?


Nothing.

 

[chikenwing]

"JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday"

Gosh...I wonder what "experts" think a terrorist is? Stupid comment.

Your use of the word "terrorist" is more expansive than most of us believe. I doubt any political motive existed in the troubled mind of the shooters in our four most recent mass murders (Arizona, Colorado, Washington and Connecticut) nor were they (apparently) religious zealots (like Roeder, Rudolph) or revolutionary crackpots like the far left three decades ago (SLA, Weatherman).

Motivation matters not,no security means no security.

 

[Wry Catcher]

JERUSALEM "Israel's policy on issuing guns is restrictive, and armed guards at its schools are meant to stop terrorists, not crazed or disgruntled gunmen, experts said Monday, rejecting claims by America's top gun lobby that Israel serves as proof for its philosophy that the U.S. needs more weapons, not fewer.

"Far from the image of a heavily armed population where ordinary people have their own arsenals to repel attackers, Israel allows its people to acquire firearms only if they can prove their professions or places of residence put them in danger. The country relies on its security services, not armed citizens, to prevent terror attacks."

Israel rejects NRA's guns-in-schools claim - CBS News

What's the difference between a terrorist and a crazed and disgruntled gunman?


Nothing.

Lots. Planning, numbers, tactics, goals, training and martyr status.