POZ Community Forums
Off Topic Forums => Off Topic Forum => Topic started by: RAB on January 08, 2011, 02:39:05 pm
-
Is this what politics has come to here in the U.S.?
Is the rhetoric and violence inspiring hate this strong?
I'm saddened beyond belief.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40978517/ns/politics/
What the hell has this country become?
RAB
edited to change title
-
CNN is now reporting that she's in surgery. Previously they were reporting that she had died.
RAB
-
Ugh. Giffords was one of the good ones. Comparatively speaking.
Why couldn't it have been Michele Bachmann? If anyone ever needed a slug to the head it's that fucker.
MtD
-
She was also one of the ones who had their offices vandalized after voting for healthcare reform. First political assassination in the US since 1979. Hooray for "Second Amendment remedies".
-
We just got home and heard of this happening. Watching CNN now...
Rray
-
Terrible news indeed , I hate it when people shoot Democrats .
-
(http://i892.photobucket.com/albums/ac127/skeebo1969/indy_calendar9_bachman.jpg)
-
Hopefully she will make it through surgery. Word is they have a 21 yr old in custody. Have to hold off in speculating on the reasons for the shooting. I hope it's not a political radical idiot who disagreed, but am fearful it will be politically motivated.
-
... "Second Amendment remedies".
I am afraid that is exactly what this is. If so Sharon Angle should be held accountable, of course that's not possible, but words do have meaning. Maybe this will be a wake up call to those who use such vile language.
-
I am afraid that is exactly what this is. If so Sharon Angle should be held accountable, of course that's not possible, but words do have meaning. Maybe this will be a wake up call to those who use such vile language.
Yairs, but Glenn Beck will pin this on the Left.
MtD
-
Yairs, but Glenn Beck will pin this on the Left.
MtD
Guns don't kill people, people kill people
When I said that I didn't mean it literally.
I cannot help what others do, anyone who knows me knows that I was speaking figuratively and do not support such an act
Are just some of the types of things we will hear. And heaven forbid the suspect is an immigrant
-
... I want my country back
(http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/1294/aakelly048c.png)
-
The reports are stating that 18 people were shot , 6 dead, 12 wounded
-
Giffords tweeted shortly before the shooting, saying: "My 1st Congress on Your Corner starts now. Please stop by to let me know what is on your mind or tweet me later."
Looks to me like the shooter had some confusion involving the word "tweet" or something...
-
Word is Giffords is expected to survive.
-
This is terrible.
I had high hopes for Arizona. ???
-
One of the wounded is a child. :'(
-
a doctor from the hospital just said that the Congresswoman is still alive. One person has died -- a young child.
-
Word is Giffords is expected to survive.
She may survive Woods but what is her quality of life going to be like, I read she took a bullet to the head, that can and possibly will cause severe brain damage.
Aroha
Jan
-
The killer has been ID'd now as Jared Laughner (http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001952074770&sk=wall). Nice facebook pic, dontchathink?
-
The killer has been ID'd now as Jared Laughner (http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001952074770&sk=wall). Nice facebook pic, dontchathink?
Now that BookFace page is one of the lamest Poe's I've encountered.
MtD
-
Now that BookFace page is one of the lamest Poe's I've encountered.
MtD
Did you see that Jared's a cock sucking Log Cabin Tea Bagger as well? Actually I think this must be a Malkin-esque attempt to frame a liberal for the shooting. I'm quite sure that information wasn't present when I first put up the link.
(http://i1007.photobucket.com/albums/af197/bedstuy65/jared.jpg)
-
Did you see that Jared's a cock sucking Log Cabin Tea Bagger as well? Actually I think this must be a Malkin-esque attempt to frame a liberal for the shooting. I'm quite sure that information wasn't present when I first put up the link.
(http://s1007.photobucket.com/albums/af197/bedstuy65/?action-view¤t=jared.jpg)
Clearly a frame up. The Stalin pic is the dead giveaway. One thing about the Right -- they just can't do funneh.
I read she took a bullet to the head, that can and possibly will cause severe brain damage.
I hope not. Severe brain damage would render her a Republican. :(
MtD
-
I just heard that a 9 y.o. child was killed, along with 5 others dead.
This is a tragic horrible even.
Good new on Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford's...She was shot in the head and the surgeon was very "Optimistic."
-
Enjoy checking out the gunman's youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Classitup10
-
Carribou Barbie is to blame!. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/24/sarah-palins-pac-puts-gun_n_511433.html)
MtD
-
Enjoy checking out the gunman's youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Classitup10
Wow. There's a whole lotta crazy going on on that page! Did any of you read through those videos? Hoooboy!
-
Wow. There's a whole lotta crazy going on on that page! Did any of you read through those videos? Hoooboy!
I did. I'm beginning to think his FB page is legit. One seriously deranged young chap.
Should also be noted that a federal judge was popped in the spree.
MtD
-
Enjoy checking out the gunman's youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Classitup10
Check out his reads, Aesop Fables to Mein Kampf... that's one hell of a transition LMAO.
-
Enjoy checking out the gunman's youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Classitup10
?????? I am not sure what all that was about....l ???
-
Check out his reads, Aesop Fables to Mein Kampf... that's one hell of a transition LMAO.
That's what made me think twice regarding the BookFace page.
But then I've read Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto as well.
Where's mah gun? >:(
MtD
-
I did. I'm beginning to think his FB page is legit. One seriously deranged young chap.
Should also be noted that a federal judge was popped in the spree.
MtD
No, the fb I linked to is not legit -- his last name has been corrected in new sources as Loughner, not Laughner.
Here's a screen cap of his myspace page before it was yanked down: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kittenstoe/5337086764/
-
Some video of Ms Giffords being interviewed following an attack on her office after the health care vote.
(link) (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/36033690#36033690)
Always helpful to note the human aspect in these situations.
MtD
-
Always helpful to note the human aspect in these situations.
MtD
Watching the video makes me wonder where the bullet struck her, I know it was the head but which part I mean. I'm going to remain optimistic for her and her career, memories of James Brady come to mind here.
-
Maybe if there were some gun laws... nah. 280 million guns in America, almost one for each citizen. I expect this is just the beginning. What I cannot understand is how the NRA, with 4 million members, can hold the country hostage to a woeful lack of gun laws. The Second Amendment never mentioned that every person, sane or not, could or should own a gun. But given the current Supreme Court, nothing, as usual, will happen.
-
Maybe if there were some gun laws... nah. 280 million guns in America, almost one for each citizen. I expect this is just the beginning. What I cannot understand is how the NRA, with 4 million members, can hold the country hostage to a woeful lack of gun laws. The Second Amendment never mentioned that every person, sane or not, could or should own a gun. But given the current Supreme Court, nothing, as usual, will happen.
You don't know anything about the Congresswoman do you Joe? She is an advocate of the second amendment and she is a gun owning woman.
-
You don't know anything about the Congresswoman do you Joe? She is an advocate of the second amendment and she is a gun owning woman.
And now she's been shot in the head by a fuckwit, Rod. What's yer point?
MtD
-
The Pima County Sheriff is currently giving a press conference. I like the way this guy thinks!!!
And Rod doesn't matter whether she supports gun rights or not, Joe's statement is spot on
-
You don't know anything about the Congresswoman do you Joe? She is an advocate of the second amendment and she is a gun owning woman.
Rod, I am very familiar with her stand regarding guns and that was not my point. There is a total lack of effective gun control in America, as witnessed by the thousands of deaths each year. Gun dealers use loopholes and allow straw purchases and nobody cares, until those guns starting shooting your Congresswoman, Federal Judge and a 9 year old girl. Are you serious that the second amendment guarantees that every person can have a gun, period? While you think about that, maybe you can tell me why sports hunters, need armor piercing bullets and automatic weapons for hunting animals?
All I am asking for is some sanity in gun control, because responsible gun owners are not the problem here.
-
And Rod doesn't matter whether she supports gun rights or not, Joe's statement is spot on
not really. if she had been less pro-gun and perhaps had worked with the legislature to pass tighter gun laws, the shooter might not have had a gun to shoot with.
All I am asking for is some sanity in gun control, because responsible gun owners are not the problem here.
sadly, until he shot the Congresswoman and these other people, he probably was a responsible gun owner.
-
The Pima County Sheriff is currently giving a press conference. I like the way this guy thinks!!!
He was excellent, indeed.
-
Out of respect of the families involved, I believe we should not be discussing anything outside the scope of the OP. We can continue any ancillary discussion in another thread.
-
Rod, I am very familiar with her stand regarding guns and that was not my point. There is a total lack of effective gun control in America, as witnessed by the thousands of deaths each year. Gun dealers use loopholes and allow straw purchases and nobody cares, until those guns starting shooting your Congresswoman, Federal Judge and a 9 year old girl. Are you serious that the second amendment guarantees that every person can have a gun, period? While you think about that, maybe you can tell me why sports hunters, need armor piercing bullets and automatic weapons for hunting animals?
All I am asking for is some sanity in gun control, because responsible gun owners are not the problem here.
There is no lack of control in law abiding citizens, it's your lack of control in unlawful abiding citizens. You can make all the laws you want on gun contols and your law abiding citizens will follow them. Then you will be left with, what you started with, unlawful abiding citizens.
-
There is no lack of control in law abiding citizens, it's your lack of control in unlawful abiding citizens. You can make all the laws you want on gun contols and your law abiding citizens will follow them. Then you will be left with, what you started with, unlawful abiding citizens.
Joe has a hand in this? Whoa this is gotta be the coolest stuff eva!!
-
What a tragedy! Its sad to think things in this country have reached a point that something like this happened.
-
Good think the gunman's name is Jared and not Mustapha.
-
Being here from Tucson the City is in shock so quiet
Gabby IS a great woman
I will keep her and all who were shot in my prayers
-
Looks like someone will have some serious PR damage control to do in the few days..
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/235408/SARAH-PALIN-TARGET-MAP.jpg)
-
Looks like someone will have some serious PR damage control to do in the few days..
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/235408/SARAH-PALIN-TARGET-MAP.jpg)
they'll probably just replace one of the white cross-hair targets for a red set....
-
not really. if she had been less pro-gun and perhaps had worked with the legislature to pass tighter gun laws, the shooter might not have had a gun to shoot with.
sadly, until he shot the Congresswoman and these other people, he probably was a responsible gun owner.
Seriously.!!!.you actually believe that?..I guess the same can be said for every lunatic that has opened fire and killed innocent people...people like him are nutters there is nothing responsible about them.
Jan
-
Seriously.!!!.you actually believe that?..I guess the same can be said for every lunatic that has opened fire and killed innocent people...people like him are nutters there is nothing responsible about them.
in America you're not guilty of thought crime (well, for the most part LOL), you're only guilty for REAL crimes. Until a person shoots someone else, they are just another citizen. Someone usually has to actually commit a crime of assault or murder before they can be arrested or convicted of a crime. Unfortuantely, it's very hard - if not impossible - to know in advance who is going to commit these kinds of crimes, so there's no way to arrest them before the fact. so yes every "lunatic" IS an innocent person until they actually commit a crime.
-
in America you're not guilty of thought crime (well, for the most part LOL), you're only guilty for REAL crimes. Until a person shoots someone else, they are just another citizen. Someone usually has to actually commit a crime of assault or murder before they can be arrested or convicted of a crime. Unfortuantely, it's very hard - if not impossible - to know in advance who is going to commit these kinds of crimes, so there's no way to arrest them before the fact. so yes every "lunatic" IS an innocent person until they actually commit a crime.
Shiiiiiiiiiiiiit! Check out the big lawyer brain on Mikey!
You should call up the supreme court. I dunno how they're getting on without you.
MtD
/edit: OMG TYOP/
-
Shiiiiiiiiiiiiit! Check out the big lawyer brain on Mikey!
Sigh! It's always a sad day indeed when simply speaking logic and truth gets one mocked. Jan seemed to think I was out-of-touch believing someone should actually commit a crime before we declare them a criminal; and I was simply trying to explain causality.
Maybe where y'all live, you have the clairvoyance to know before someone is about to go on a shooting spree so that y'all can arrest them before the kill anyone. (like in "Minority Report") Y'all sure could have saved some Americans some grief over here if you had called any FBI office with a helpful tip before this incident happened.
mikie
who's listening to the Eurythmics "1984" and thinking about thoughtcrime
-
Maybe where y'all live, you have the clairvoyance to know before someone is about to go on a shooting spree so that y'all can arrest them before the kill anyone.
Naw dude theys got the same problems man'..... ask Ivan Milat.
But seriously...... nevermind.
-
The incomparable Keith Olbermann's Special Comment on the Giffords shooting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq38Nnf4pOw&feature=player_embedded
-
Naw dude theys got the same problems man'..... ask Ivan Milat.
But seriously...... nevermind.
Heh. Funny you mention Ivan. I once saw this spray painted on a wall near a hostel in Coogee:
Free Ivan Milat. All is forgiven.
But seriously Skeeter. If you really knew what you were talking about you would have said "ask Phuong Ngo" not "ask Ivan Milat".
Best,
MtD
-
who's listening to the Eurythmics "1984" and thinking about thoughtcrime
Who said anything about thought crime (well, except you..)?
If you meant that he wasn't a criminal before he actually shot and kill people, for clarity sake you probably shouldn't have said he was a "responsible" gun owner. I surely didn't know what exactly you meant (still don't actually) by "responsible".
-
Some video of Ms Giffords being interviewed following an attack on her office after the health care vote.
(link) (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/36033690#36033690)
Always helpful to note the human aspect in these situations.
MtD
Being a news junkie, I remembered this interview when I heard the news tonight. Regardless of whether this guy ever heard any of violent rhetoric (which I think he did), this should be a huge wake-up call for Sarah and others. I have been waiting to hear the news of someone being shot after all the violent rhetoric.
-
The incomparable Keith Olbermann's Special Comment on the Giffords shooting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq38Nnf4pOw&feature=player_embedded
When I saw your link, I was confused about what day it was. So, Keith came in on a Saturday to anchor coverage and do a special comment? I'm currently in a conservative part of Florida, I guess, where they put MSNBC on a higher tier on cable and you can't see it on basic. You can see FOX, though.
Thanks for sharing.
-
So, Keith came in on a Saturday to anchor coverage and do a special comment?
Yup, he came in on his day off.
P.S. In a further tragic irony, I've just seen that the 9-year-old girl killed in the shooting today has been identified as Christina Green, who was one of the "Faces of Hope, Babies Born on 9/11."
-
P.S. In a further tragic irony, I've just seen that the 9-year-old girl killed in the shooting today has been identified as Christina Green, who was one of the "Faces of Hope, Babies Born on 9/11."
Hey Leatherman try telling the parents of that young girl that the gunman was a "responsible" young gun owner, before he decide to shoot a Congresswomen in the head and kill their daughter.. >:(
-
Until a person shoots someone else, they are just another citizen. Someone usually has to actually commit a crime of assault or murder before they can be arrested or convicted of a crime.
Wrong again Perry Mason. People are arrested and convicted for thinking and plotting a crime without ever pulling a trigger.
-
Profile of suspect :
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40980334/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts
The judge that was killed:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40985623/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
Ray
-
I'm currently in a conservative part of Florida, I guess, where they put MSNBC on a higher tier on cable and you can't see it on basic. You can see FOX, though.
Thanks for sharing.
Really,... That surprises me,.. Basic cable here in Pinellas County ( which is also conservative) Shows MSNBC , on Brighthouse basic and Fios basic. HHHMMMmmmmmm... Where you at? Ft Myers or Naples?
And Edfu , thanks for sharing the Olberman clip. Somehow I missed it. Fell asleep.
Ray
-
I realize I risk the ire of many. I know that some who disagree with me are the wisest voices here.
The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
I am a gun owner. I hunt. I also have firearms solely for home/self defense. I am a military veteran. I swore an oath to defend this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And I have a concealed carry permit. I think it is a damn shame no one in that crowd returned fire.
This man is insane, it is symantics to argue if he was a criminal before or after he commited an act of violence. The gun control debate is a diversion, a distraction. Preventing people from legally obtaining firearms will not stop criminals from doing the same, they are crimnals and do not follow the laws. He should be punished for his crimes.
The victims of this crime were not victims of law. To shift the blame from the criminal to a debate of law demeans their loss.
It is true, the rhetoric of both the right and the left has become far too polarizing. This country is not of Us and Them. It is a country of We the People. But the solution is not to sacrifice our rights and liberties one by one until we wake up and realize we are no longer a free people.
-
I realize I risk the ire of many. I know that some who disagree with me are the wisest voices here.
The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
I am a gun owner. I hunt. I also have firearms solely for home/self defense. I am a military veteran. I swore an oath to defend this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And I have a concealed carry permit. I think it is a damn shame no one in that crowd returned fire.
This man is insane, it is symantics to argue if he was a criminal before or after he commited an act of violence. The gun control debate is a diversion, a distraction. Preventing people from legally obtaining firearms will not stop criminals from doing the same, they are crimnals and do not follow the laws. He should be punished for his crimes.
The victims of this crime were not victims of law. To shift the blame from the criminal to a debate of law demeans their loss.
It is true, the rhetoric of both the right and the left has become far too polarizing. This country is not of Us and Them. It is a country of We the People. But the solution is not to sacrifice our rights and liberties one by one until we wake up and realize we are no longer a free people.
I am not attacking the right of Americans to own guns, rather I am looking for some sanity in both the types of weapons/ammo sold and closing loopholes that allow people to buy guns without any background check. Personally, I cannot understand how automatic weapons or armor-piercing bullets are needed for either hunting or personal defense, yet they are sold by the thousands. Or the loophole, for weekend gun sales, where you can buy a weapon, no questions asked, nor sanity required. Or gun dealers who sell AK7's by the lot and who exactly do they think are going to use these weapons and for what? This is my issue with the gun control laws.
It has been documented that there are about a dozen gun dealers, located near the Mexican border that sell guns that wind up on both sides of the border, often in the hands of drug dealers. How is there any sanity to that approach? What confuses me the most however, is why responsible gun owners, like yourself are not pressuring both the NRA and lawmakers to close these loopholes. I think that every gun sold in the US, should be subject to a three-day waiting period, both for possible cool down of potential owners and for verification of a background check. Not enough of that happens and there are far too many gun dealers who will sell a gun to anyone, just to make a buck.
I am a fierce advocate of equal rights, including gun rights. However, guns have overrun America, with little control and nobody can convince me that stricter gun laws would not be effective. Please help me to understand how allowing someone, with no background check, to purchase 6 AK7s, at a weekend gun show, is consistent with the intent of the Second Amendment. Yes, you may have the right to keep and bear arms, but I also have an equal right, not to be shot by a gun that was sold illegally, by a licensed gun dealer.
-
I am not attacking the right of Americans to own guns, rather I am looking for some sanity in both the types of weapons/ammo sold and closing loopholes that allow people to buy guns without any background check. Personally, I cannot understand how automatic weapons or armor-piercing bullets are needed for either hunting or personal defense, yet they are sold by the thousands. Or the loophole, for weekend gun sales, where you can buy a weapon, no questions asked, nor sanity required. Or gun dealers who sell AK7's by the lot and who exactly do they think are going to use these weapons and for what? This is my issue with the gun control laws.
It has been documented that there are about a dozen gun dealers, located near the Mexican border that sell guns that wind up on both sides of the border, often in the hands of drug dealers. How is there any sanity to that approach? What confuses me the most however, is why responsible gun owners, like yourself are not pressuring both the NRA and lawmakers to close these loopholes. I think that every gun sold in the US, should be subject to a three-day waiting period, both for possible cool down of potential owners and for verification of a background check. Not enough of that happens and there are far too many gun dealers who will sell a gun to anyone, just to make a buck.
I am a fierce advocate of equal rights, including gun rights. However, guns have overrun America, with little control and nobody can convince me that stricter gun laws would not be effective. Please help me to understand how allowing someone, with no background check, to purchase 6 AK7s, at a weekend gun show, is consistent with the intent of the Second Amendment. Yes, you may have the right to keep and bear arms, but I also have an equal right, not to be shot by a gun that was sold illegally, by a licensed gun dealer.
He didn't use armor-piercing bullets, he used 9mm. He was kicked out of college and could not return until he was given a release from Mental Health that he wasn't a threat to himself or others and the same thing happened at his HighSchool where the police were called 5 times. Now where was the ball dropped?
-
He didn't use armor-piercing bullets, he used 9mm. He was kicked out of college and could not return until he was given a release from Mental Health that he wasn't a threat to himself or others and the same thing happened at his HighSchool where the police were called 5 times. Now where was the ball dropped?
Where? How did he get the 9mm?
-
He went a bought it legally at Gun Warehouse in Tucson in November.
-
He went a bought it legally at Gun Warehouse in Tucson in November.
My point exactly. Why did they sell a gun to a unbalanced man, with a documented history of mental issues?
-
I think it is a damn shame no one in that crowd returned fire.
Yes, that would have been nice; a few more innocent bystanders shot and possibly killed by someone who wasn't a trained sniper, someone who happened to have a gun and panicked. Great stuff. Not.
Preventing people from legally obtaining firearms will not stop criminals from doing the same, they are crimnals and do not follow the laws.
The UK has strict gun laws and it is rare in the extreme to hear of a shooting like this one. Sure, there are criminals in the UK who manage to get a hold of and use guns, but more often than not the only people they shoot are other criminals who are encroaching on their territory.
-
My point exactly. Why did they sell a gun to a unbalanced man, with a documented history of mental issues?
He wasn't entered by the police in the data base that he had a history of mental problems. If it is not flagged in the computer, gun sales don't know they are only given limited information on the buyer's background check. You wouldn't expect him to fill out the form correctly stating he has mental issues do you? If he does have a Mental Disease he may honestly believe he is not sick.
-
Jan Brewer is in way way over her ability.
She's a disgrace to the nation.
Not everyone is qualified for government responsibility.
The idea that this is leadership contributes somehow, I think, to the empowerment of freaky violent fringers like this assassin.
Somehow, its all the same ballgame. Lunatics on the loose.
Hide your wife, hide your kids, cause they killing everyone down there.
-
Ann, the UK may not have the gun problems we have but you all sure have the knife problems.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2517779/Daily-UK-knife-crimes-soar.html (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2517779/Daily-UK-knife-crimes-soar.html)
-
Ann, the UK may not have the gun problems we have but you all sure have the knife problems.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2517779/Daily-UK-knife-crimes-soar.html (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2517779/Daily-UK-knife-crimes-soar.html)
I never said there wasn't a problem with knives, but do you honestly believe a person could knife 18 people, killing six of them, as easily and in the same setting as the Tuscon shootings? Get a grip.
-
I never said there wasn't a problem with knives, but do you honestly believe a person could knife 18 people, killing six of them, as easily and in the same setting as the Tuscon shootings? Get a grip.
How about this one Ann? Never heard that much about it in the US.
Derrick Bird, who shot 12 people dead in Cumbria, owned his three licensed guns perfectly legally and the UK has the strictest gun laws around.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/02/police-no-grounds-derrick-bird-guns-ban (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/02/police-no-grounds-derrick-bird-guns-ban)
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsN0FCXw914
PS - I post this not to trivialize the tragedy.. it's just that sometimes comedies do make the sharpest points..
-
Fully automatic weapons require a class III firearms license. Any sale of a class III firearm is subject to a waiting period, background check, and mandatory reporting to the local sheriff. Gun shows don't side step that requirement. The loophole that gunshows exploit doesn't allow class III private sales, and that loop hole even as it currently exists is opposed by many gun owners. NRA members are by no means quiet folks, or of a single mind, there is a great deal of internal disagreement about the private sale loophole. I personally believe, that anyone who is legally entitled to own a firearm, should be required to report that possession. I also believe that safe handling and training should be required. Dealers that break the laws should have their FFDL revoked for life, and should be prosecuted. The laws as they currently exist, are not being fully upheld, and that is a problem.
And I go a step further than many. I think anyone owning a firearm should have to swear an oath of allegiance, be considered member of a citizen militia, and subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. You'll never see that happen though. To me, that would be more in tune with the intention of the 2nd amendment.
The kid in Arizona used a 9mm semiautomatic, not a very powerful round at all. Little consolation to his victims.
-
He bought that 9mm AFTER having already made death threats. Someone dropped the ball.
-
How about this one Ann? Never heard that much about it in the US.
Derrick Bird, who shot 12 people dead in Cumbria, owned his three licensed guns perfectly legally and the UK has the strictest gun laws around.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/02/police-no-grounds-derrick-bird-guns-ban (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/02/police-no-grounds-derrick-bird-guns-ban)
Of course I've heard of that - I never said it never happened, I said it was rare in the extreme. Shootings are a daily occurrence in the States, but most of them don't involve nationally known politicians or federal judges and so don't gain the wide-spread coverage as the Tucson shootings. I mean, how many drive-bys happen in a week in the US?
The UK has strict gun laws and it is rare in the extreme to hear of a shooting like this one. Sure, there are criminals in the UK who manage to get a hold of and use guns, but more often than not the only people they shoot are other criminals who are encroaching on their territory.
Anyway, I've got better things to do with the rest of my Sunday afternoon than to debate gun control with you. I'm not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change my mind. You lot in the US can keep killing each other if you want.
-
Of course I've heard of that - I never said it never happened, I said it was rare in the extreme. Shootings are a daily occurrence in the States, but most of them don't involve nationally known politicians or federal judges and so don't gain the wide-spread coverage as the Tucson shootings. I mean, how many drive-bys happen in a week in the US?
Anyway, I've got better things to do with the rest of my Sunday afternoon than to debate gun control with you. I'm not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change my mind. You lot in the US can keep killing each other if you want.
Drive-bys aren't done by people that aren't criminals and criminals will obtain guns anyway they can legally or not. Stricter laws will only apply to law abiding citizens.
-
Germany, Britain, Switzerland and France have experienced crazy shootings in recent years. Doesn't seem to happen quite as often as in the US. I don't think gun law is the route to deeper understanding of crazies on the loose with guns. Its apples and oranges. Two equally important dilemmas.
OK I see the point about guns being more deadly than knives, of course.
This was a political assassination. I don't yet see the clear explanation in his ramblings. It seems to be about literacy and I dunno what - seems to be somehow about deficit - government printing money to pay for bloated programs? - which seems to be related to the health care issue. And the Congresswoman voted for that.
And New York times did an article just a day or two ago about how in Arizona, latin literature class in high school was deemed illegal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/us/08ethnic.html?scp=1&sq=mexican%20literature&st=cse
Rift in Arizona as Latino Class Is Found Illegal
It doesn't take a rocket scientist or Sigmund Freud to start getting a general hypothesis about how this shooting made sense for this psychotic.
Exact details to come soon.
-
Yes, that would have been nice; a few more innocent bystanders shot and possibly killed by someone who wasn't a trained sniper, someone who happened to have a gun and panicked. Great stuff. Not.
The flip side of that argument is perhaps a 9y/o would be alive today. We jsut dont know.
and dont start with the "England has no crime because we have strict gun control". I think England leads the world in Robberies, rapes and burglaries.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/7922755/England-has-worse-crime-rate-than-the-US-says-Civitas-study.html
In the last month here in SA Ive seen 2 or 3 stories about a home intruder being shot dead by the homeowner before he could rape, rob or steal. Bravo. It will take a minimum 8 mintues for the police to arrive at my house after I initiate a 911 call for help, i want a fighting chance in those circumstance as the police just are not able to protect me.
Is anyone understanding the possibility that If this guy did not have a gun he may have ran his car at 60mph into the crowd? Perhaps we should have stricter car control.
The problem with guns is the lax oversight, as several people mentioned someone dropped the ball with this wack job.
-W
-
Also, his freaky Youtube videos will be in several contemporary art shows.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NE0BzDZ6yMY&feature=related
-
The flip side of that argument is perhaps a 9y/o would be alive today. We jsut dont know.
and dont start with the "England has no crime because we have strict gun control". I think England leads the world in Robberies, rapes and burglaries.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/7922755/England-has-worse-crime-rate-than-the-US-says-Civitas-study.html
In the last month here in SA Ive seen 2 or 3 stories about a home intruder being shot dead by the homeowner before he could rape, rob or steal. Bravo. It will take a minimum 8 mintues for the police to arrive at my house after I initiate a 911 call for help, i want a fighting chance in those circumstance as the police just are not able to protect me.
Is anyone understanding the possibility that If this guy did not have a gun he may have ran his car at 60mph into the crowd? Perhaps we should have stricter car control.
The problem with guns is the lax oversight, as several people mentioned someone dropped the ball with this wack job.
-W
You're comparing robberies to deaths? How utterly mind blowing.
-
and dont start with the "England has no crime because we have strict gun control".
Oh come off it, I never said that nor will I ever say that. No crime? Get a grip. Crime is everywhere.
I think England leads the world in Robberies, rapes and burglaries.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/7922755/England-has-worse-crime-rate-than-the-US-says-Civitas-study.html
That is NOT what that article states. No where near. ::)
You're comparing robberies to deaths? How utterly mind blowing.
Breathtaking, isn't it.
-
Jan Brewer lied about her nazi-fighting heroic father.
Jan Brewer lied about headless bodies in the desert.
Jan Brewer was elected despite these bald faced lies, because a certain electorate in the US wants these bald faced lies.
This nut case assassin also believes he can create reality out of thin air. He's obsessed with mind control.
(Also with his college failure.)
-
The Tea Party "radicalised" Republican congress made a big show of reading the Constitution on the floor. It was an alarming spectacle of the absence of a mature adult interpretation of this text. One side wants to use it in only one way (in a purged form, no less) to do one political agenda which holds little water - just endless spectacle to keep the power and wealth in the hegemonic few.
This nutcase's youtube videos are also filled with some kind of cockamamie references to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
As were Timothy McVeighs actions.
-
Who said anything about thought crime (well, except you..)?
If you meant that he wasn't a criminal before he actually shot and kill people, for clarity sake you probably shouldn't have said he was a "responsible" gun owner. I surely didn't know what exactly you meant (still don't actually) by "responsible".
I'm sure you can understand what a "responsible gun owner" is. it's not that hard. ;) For brevity sake - a responsible gun owner is one that owns a gun and does not kill people with it. that's all any of us can guess, sadly, until someone commits a crime with a gun. As I said, Jan implied that we/I should have known this guy was a lunatic from the start who was going to shoot someone. Trying to guess before hand who's going to be "irresponsible" (especially just using the criteria of mental health problems as the definitive knowledge of knowing who will commit a crime) is like accusing someone of thoughtcrime.
How do I know that any of YOU aren't lunatics/nutters who will go on a rampage one day? LOL How do y'all know that I won't? See how that works? None of us is guilty.... right now... and there's no way to know. So for the time being, we all seem to be "rational and responsible" citizens in our respective countries.
Wrong again Perry Mason. People are arrested and convicted for thinking and plotting a crime without ever pulling a trigger.
looking to pick a fight with me, you misunderstood my whole sentence. the word "usually" implies that NOT everyone is arrested for committing crimes by the very act of committing the crime. It gives leeway for "some" to be arrested without doing the actual crime. For the most part however, people ARE arrested for actually doing a crime. It's much rarer to be arrested for NOT committing a crime but only thinking about it. and usually the thinking has to require the actual plotting. Without the plot or plans, which are actually criminal actions in and of themselves, then there are only thoughts which as of yet our judicial system has not learned how to divine.
try telling the parents of that young girl that the gunman was a "responsible" young gun owner, before he decide to shoot a Congresswomen in the head and kill their daughter
just because you think I'm a jerk doesn't make it so. I know I would never be that hateful to anyone who suffered a loss like this. I wouldn't go to the parents of someone killed by a drunk driver and say the driver had been a "responsible driver" until he murdered their child either. (even if with no points on their license and no other issues, even if the person "might" have been a responsible driver for the 20 yrs preceding this one event)
But since you don't have the power of clairvoyance, you couldn't have said the day before this incident that this man was a lunatic and was about to become a murderer and had him locked up for NOT killing anyone. We can't just go around arresting all the "nutters" because you think they might go postal.
Until this guy shot these people, even with the issues of his mental health, there was no way to know that he was going to shoot into a crowd of people. He could have just as easily bombed an abortion clinic, run a car into the crowd, or even hung himself. Guns don't commit the crimes people do. Sure guns help; but so do cars and knives and bombs.
Personally, I'm all for tighter gun control - the kind that actual reduces the amount of weapons so that "irresponsible people" (whoever and whatever they are) along with criminals and people with mental health issues are less likely to be to obtain guns/weapons. It still won't totally solve the issue though, because there's no way to totally protect ourselves from all the random, "crazy" actions of determined people.
-
The Tea Party "radicalised" Republican congress made a big show of reading the Constitution on the floor. It was an alarming spectacle of the absence of a mature adult interpretation of this text. One side wants to use it in only one way (in a purged form, no less) to do one political agenda which holds little water - just endless spectacle to keep the power and wealth in the hegemonic few.
This nutcase's youtube videos are also filed with some kind of cockamamie references to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
As were Timothy McVeighs actions.
I am no fan of the Tea Party or Republican's stands on most issues, but it is rhetoric like this that is part of the problem. Political opponents should not act like deadly enemies (not my line, I heard it on Meet the Press today). I have friends with different political thoughts than mine, we generally have civil discussions -- hell, we've even helped each other have "light bulb" moments because we don't demonize.
Why did I quote this entry -- because Rep. Giffords herself took part in the reading of the Constitution on the floor of the US House of Representatives. While I agree that it was all about political theater -- I find nothing "alarming" about Congress reading the US Constitution. The right does not have a monopoly on overheated rhetoric or in attempting to portray the other side as evil.
Using this tragedy to try and change the tone of discourse would result in some good coming out of it, using to score political points will simply lead to more of the same.
Mike
-
I'm sure you can understand what a "responsible gun owner" is. it's not that hard. ;) For brevity sake - a responsible gun owner is one that owns a gun and does not kill people with it. that's all any of us can guess, sadly, until someone commits a crime with a gun. As I said, Jan implied that we/I should have known this guy was a lunatic from the start who was going to shoot someone. Trying to guess before hand who's going to be "irresponsible" (especially just using the criteria of mental health problems as the definitive knowledge of knowing who will commit a crime) is like accusing someone of thoughtcrime.
How do I know that any of YOU aren't lunatics/nutters who will go on a rampage one day? LOL How do y'all know that I won't? See how that works? None of us is guilty.... right now... and there's no way to know. So for the time being, we all seem to be "rational and responsible" citizens in our respective countries.
looking to pick a fight with me, you misunderstood my whole sentence. the word "usually" implies that NOT everyone is arrested for committing crimes by the very act of committing the crime. It gives leeway for "some" to be arrested without doing the actual crime. For the most part however, people ARE arrested for actually doing a crime. It's much rarer to be arrested for NOT committing a crime but only thinking about it. and usually the thinking has to require the actual plotting. Without the plot or plans, which are actually criminal actions in and of themselves, then there are only thoughts which as of yet our judicial system has not learned how to divine.
just because you think I'm a jerk doesn't make it so. I know I would never be that hateful to anyone who suffered a loss like this. I wouldn't go to the parents of someone killed by a drunk driver and say the driver had been a "responsible driver" until he murdered their child either. (even if with no points on their license and no other issues, even if the person "might" have been a responsible driver for the 20 yrs preceding this one event)
But since you don't have the power of clairvoyance, you couldn't have said the day before this incident that this man was a lunatic and was about to become a murderer and had him locked up for NOT killing anyone. We can't just go around arresting all the "nutters" because you think they might go postal.
Until this guy shot these people, even with the issues of his mental health, there was no way to know that he was going to shoot into a crowd of people. He could have just as easily bombed an abortion clinic, run a car into the crowd, or even hung himself. Guns don't commit the crimes people do. Sure guns help; but so do cars and knives and bombs.
Personally, I'm all for tighter gun control - the kind that actual reduces the amount of weapons so that "irresponsible people" (whoever and whatever they are) along with criminals and people with mental health issues are less likely to be to obtain guns/weapons. It still won't totally solve the issue though, because there's no way to totally protect ourselves from all the random, "crazy" actions of determined people.
I say, I say, I say...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx98pskffOY&feature=related
-
I dont understand why this story is mostly about gun control and why you are all bickering and nikpiking each other when its obvious everyone thinks its a terrible loss that people died. no one is insensitive to that.
Timothy McVeigh didn't happen to have a truck bomb and randomly search for victims.
The Congresswoman was the target.
-
I think it is a damn shame no one in that crowd returned fire.
Can you imagine..... this being Sarah Palin?
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTkdRnt4NkO9e_wT7q5o2m1trSu3aUT-Rbk7Tf4wV5_Ed6B-CHw)
-
Stark news:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/09/jared-loughner-youtube-videos-_n_806370.html
WASHINGTON -- Jared Lee Loughner, the alleged shooter of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and others on Saturday, may have ties to anti-Semitic, anti-immigration hate group American Renaissance, according to a leaked memo from the Department of Homeland Security.
.......
The group's connection to anti-Semitism is slightly more complicated. Although Holocaust deniers and neo-Nazis are often present at New Century Foundation conferences, group founder Jared Taylor cracked down on anti-Semitic speech in the magazine and at events, according to Southern Poverty Law Center. But after an anti-Semitic outburst at the 2006 conference, the group lost some of its Jewish supporters.
WASHINGTON -- Jared Lee Loughner, the alleged shooter of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and others on Saturday, may have ties to anti-Semitic, anti-immigration hate group American Renaissance, according to a leaked memo from the Department of Homeland Security.
It's unclear whether Loughner maintains a direct connection to the group, however, "strong suspicion is being directed" at American Renaissance in the wake of the group being referenced in Loughner's Myspace and YouTube videos, according to the memo, which was obtained by Fox News.
American Renaissance is a white nationalist group that operates under a pseudo think tank called the New Century Foundation. The group runs a magazine and conferences based on eugenics and the superiority of whites, according to Southern Poverty Law Center.
The group considers its members to be "racial-realists," according to an "About Us" section on the American Renaissance magazine website. "Attempts to gloss over the significance of race or even to deny its reality only make problems worse," the group writes. "Progress requires the study of all aspects of race, whether historical, cultural, or biological. This approach is known as race realism."
The pseudo-science in the magazine refers to biological superiority of whites, with titles such as "Swine Flu: Is There a Racial Link?" and "Ignoring Biological Reality Means Social and Economic Catastrophe." After President Barack Obama was elected in 2008, the magazine ran a feature called "Transition to Black Rule?"
American Renaissance is opposed to the entry of non-whites into the United States and supports Arizona's SB 1070 immigration law, which was criticized as racist and challenged by the Obama Justice Department. In an introduction to readers when the magazine was started in 1990, the publication wrote that "blacks and Hispanics are, compared to whites, far more likely to be poor, illiterate, on welfare, or in jail; they are far more likely to have illegitimate children, be addicted to drugs, or have AIDS. By no definition of international competitiveness can the presence of these populations be anything but a disadvantage."
The group's connection to anti-Semitism is slightly more complicated. Although Holocaust deniers and neo-Nazis are often present at New Century Foundation conferences, group founder Jared Taylor cracked down on anti-Semitic speech in the magazine and at events, according to Southern Poverty Law Center. But after an anti-Semitic outburst at the 2006 conference, the group lost some of its Jewish supporters.
Story continues below
Advertisement
Although the motivations behind Saturday's actions remain unclear, Jewish media organizations pointed to possibly anti-Semitism after Hitler's Mein Kampf was listed as one of Loughner's favorite books. Giffords is the first Jewish U.S. representative to be elected in Arizona. Gabe Zimmerman, a Giffords aide who was killed in the shooting, was also Jewish.
On immigration, Giffords holds Blue Dog views: She supports comprehensive immigration reform, including increased border security and a path to legal status for some of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the United States. Giffords voted in December for the DREAM Act, a bill that would allow undocumented immigrants who entered the country as children, to exchange in return for military service or attending college.
Although she opposes Arizona law SB 1070, Giffords also opposed the Justice Department's lawsuit against the state to stop the law. "Congresswoman Giffords wants more federal agents on the Arizona border, not federal lawyers in court arguing with state lawyers about a law that will do nothing to increase public safety in the communities she represents," her spokesman told The Hill in June.
-
And this:
Westboro Baptist Church To Picket Funerals Of Arizona Shooting Victims
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/09/westboro-baptist-church-arizona_n_806319.html
"Your federal judge is dead and your (fag-promoting, baby-killing, proud-sinner) Congresswoman fights for her life. God is avenging Himself on this rebellious house! WBC prays for your destruction--more shooters, more dead carcasses piling up, young, old, leader and commoner--all. Your doom is upon you!"
-
don't get me wrong, i'm not calling for bullets flying all around, but one well placed round, from a competent shooter, may have stopped this quickly
sarah is smokin hot, and i sure do have a crush on her, but i would never, ever, vote for her in any office, i mean look at her, she's not even looking through the scope, no cheek to stock, and her finger is already on the trigger?!
Can you imagine..... this being Sarah Palin?
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTkdRnt4NkO9e_wT7q5o2m1trSu3aUT-Rbk7Tf4wV5_Ed6B-CHw)
shaking head in disapproval
-
I say, I say, I say...
a totally unrelated cartoon? really? you mean you can't seriously carry on a conversation with me? sheesh. whatever though. ;) your contributions in our "discussions" usually don't amount to much anyway so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. As usual in our history in these forums, I should point out, that it was you, with your unsolicited comments about my postings, that has started this interaction between us. This bit of silliness and your initial nitpicking just shows that you were looking to provoke from the very beginning, not to actually participate.
-
The Palin website with a bullseye over Gabrielle Gifford's district is down now: /
http://www.talksy.com/83221/the-palin-website-with-a-bullseye-over-gabrielle-gifford-s-district-is-down-now
natch.
-
Fully automatic weapons require a class III firearms license. Any sale of a class III firearm is subject to a waiting period, background check, and mandatory reporting to the local sheriff. Gun shows don't side step that requirement. The loophole that gunshows exploit doesn't allow class III private sales, and that loop hole even as it currently exists is opposed by many gun owners. NRA members are by no means quiet folks, or of a single mind, there is a great deal of internal disagreement about the private sale loophole. I personally believe, that anyone who is legally entitled to own a firearm, should be required to report that possession. I also believe that safe handling and training should be required. Dealers that break the laws should have their FFDL revoked for life, and should be prosecuted. The laws as they currently exist, are not being fully upheld, and that is a problem.
And I go a step further than many. I think anyone owning a firearm should have to swear an oath of allegiance, be considered member of a citizen militia, and subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. You'll never see that happen though. To me, that would be more in tune with the intention of the 2nd amendment.
The kid in Arizona used a 9mm semiautomatic, not a very powerful round at all. Little consolation to his victims.
Zach, thank you for such an honest and thoughtful response. Regarding gun control, it always seems like it's all one or the other, when obviously people like you have a rational view of the reality of guns in America.
-
those westboro folk scare the $h!t outta me
And this:
Westboro Baptist Church To Picket Funerals Of Arizona Shooting Victims
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/09/westboro-baptist-church-arizona_n_806319.html
"Your federal judge is dead and your (fag-promoting, baby-killing, proud-sinner) Congresswoman fights for her life. God is avenging Himself on this rebellious house! WBC prays for your destruction--more shooters, more dead carcasses piling up, young, old, leader and commoner--all. Your doom is upon you!"
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/09/sarah-palin-rebecca-mansour-crosshairs-arizona_n_806375.html
But SarahPAC staffer Rebecca Mansour, who has been tweeting in defense of her boss since the tragedy took place, is stating that the crosshairs were never intended to be gun sights.
"We never ever, ever intended it to be gun sights," she said in an interview with talk radio host Tammy Bruce Saturday. "It was simply crosshairs like you'd see on maps." Bruce suggested that they could, in fact, be seen as "surveyor's symbols." Mansour added that "it never occurred to us that anybody would consider it violent" and called any attempts to politicize the Arizona tragedy "repulsive."
The suggestion that the symbols were related to guns seemed to come, however, from Palin herself. On March 23, Palin tweeted to her supporters a note about the aforementioned Facebook message, writing, "Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: 'Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!' Pls see my Facebook page." And as Politico's Jonathan Martin points out, in November Palin boasted about defeating 18 of the 20 members on her "bullseye" list.
-
those westboro folk scare the $h!t outta me
They scare everybody and that's the whole point. Hopefully residents will block their protest from the services.
-
sarah is smokin hot, and i sure do have a crush on her, but i would never, ever, vote for her in any office, i mean look at her, she's not even looking through the scope, no cheek to stock, and her finger is already on the trigger?!
I agree she is "smokin hot". She's got some show now..... Sarah Palin's something or another. I can't remember the exact name. Well, I tried to watch it, you know for some sort of political scope...lol In the episode I watched she fell a caribou from 100 yards away. I was highly aroused because she shot it while almost in a doggy style position.... Swwweeeeeeeeeeeeeet.
-
I agree she is "smokin hot". She's got some show now..... Sarah Palin's something or another. I can't remember the exact name. Well, I tried to watch it, you know for some sort of political scope...lol In the episode I watched she fell a caribou from 100 yards away. I was highly aroused because she shot it while almost in a doggy style position.... Swwweeeeeeeeeeeeeet.
Yes, quite the hunter she is... it only took her six shots and the caribou just stood there. Wow what sport, film killing an animal to make yourself even richer, especially when you don't know how to fire a rifle. What a Maverick!
-
Jan Brewer scares me cause she's in power. Puppet at the pulpit.
The trash swept up into these hate groups get no power finally from the politicians they are most likely to support (conversative).
Who's pulling these puppet strings? The wealthy and powerful? Kind of nebulous. I personally do not believe its "the Koch brothers", or Wall Street, per se, or alone. A scary thought is the strings are being pulled by something societal, not individual.
Jan Brewer. Sarah Palin. Christine O'Donnell. A gaggle of old hatefilled unimaginative xenophobic visionless bigoted imperialistic Republican Senators who stymied two years of possible government progress. How do these puppets run. Everready batteries?
"Kenneth, what is the Frequency?"
-
a totally unrelated cartoon? really? you mean you can't seriously carry on a conversation with me? sheesh. whatever though. ;) your contributions in our "discussions" usually don't amount to much anyway so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. As usual in our history in these forums, I should point out, that it was you, with your unsolicited comments about my postings, that has started this interaction between us. This bit of silliness and your initial nitpicking just shows that you were looking to provoke from the very beginning, not to actually participate.
Made you look. :P
-
Yes, quite the hunter she is... it only took her six shots and the caribou just stood there. Wow what sport, film killing an animal to make yourself even richer, especially when you don't know how to fire a rifle. What a Maverick!
LOLOL that was hilarious. It made her stay in the position longer though.... hell, I think daddy even looked back at her while she missed.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW0ZuzIrh4g&feature=player_embedded#!
Gov. Brewers Plan for Arizona - YouTube
-
Try telling her adoring fans, who have sponsored her rise to multimillionaire, that she isn't a maverick.
Lies lies lies lies lies and people eat them up like delicious fast food.
-
Made you look. :P
ROFL :D
-
ever seen the conditions in a slaughter house? where cattle are hit with a pnuematic hammer blow to the head, takes about 5-10 minutes to die that way
palin is obviously an impatient shooter, hopefuly the experience will teach her something about one shot one kill, but at least the kill shot was clean, that caribou dropped instantly
i'm not for glorifying hunting, but it puzzles me the double standard people seem to have with meat... i reconciled the act of killing for my food long ago, i know the reality of it firsthand
next time you eat some delicious fast food, or lace up some leather nikes, consider the condition those cows were "humanely" raised and slaughtered in
-
This thread has been hijacked so many different ways it's mind boggling.
This horrible tragedy, in my opinion, came about because of the vitriol and hate filled speech that has become so common place in our politics. Gun control? Sara Palin? Fast food?
No.
This is the mother of the 9 year old victim speaking out.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/40989496#40989496
RAB
Edit to add: When I referenced Sarah Palin I meant it's not about her shooting abilities and being smoking hot. Her website with the crosshair target is an entirely different matter.
-
This thread has been hijacked so many different ways it's mind boggling.
This horrible tragedy, in my opinion, came about because of the vitriol and hate filled speech that has become so common place in our politics. Gun control? Sara Palin? Fast food?
No.
This is the mother of the 9 year old victim speaking out.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/40989496#40989496
RAB
Edit to add: When I referenced Sarah Palin I meant it's not about her shooting abilities and being smoking hot. Her website with the crosshair target is an entirely different matter.
RAB -
I'm with you here. One can look at a number of posts here and see exactly why political discourse is probably, at least partially, responsible for this tragedy. People are passionate in their positions, which is good -- but they label those who don't agree with them as evil and any other bad name you can think of.
AND -- it's important to note that neither political "side" is innocent of this behavior.
If we demonize all that don't agree with us, then we are to blame also.
Mike
-
This horrible tragedy, in my opinion, came about because of the vitriol and hate filled speech that has become so common place in our politics.
RAB
AGREE!!! Let us hope that this incident will cause our politicians to realize that the words and images they use and the way they use them do have influence with the fringe elements of our society.
I have had to take a break from the 24hrs coverage so not sure, but has Palin or any of her followers issued a statement?
-
Oh come off it, I never said that nor will I ever say that. No crime? Get a grip. Crime is everywhere.
That is NOT what that article states. No where near. ::)
Breathtaking, isn't it.
In 2008/9, just checked the statistics for the UK, there were a total number of homocides of 651. Of these 39 used guns.
Agreed that there is plenty of crime here, bust if I'm involved in a crime there's more of a chance that I'm going to come away with my life.
-
And this:
Westboro Baptist Church To Picket Funerals Of Arizona Shooting Victims
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/09/westboro-baptist-church-arizona_n_806319.html
"Your federal judge is dead and your (fag-promoting, baby-killing, proud-sinner) Congresswoman fights for her life. God is avenging Himself on this rebellious house! WBC prays for your destruction--more shooters, more dead carcasses piling up, young, old, leader and commoner--all. Your doom is upon you!"
No offence to my friends who live in the States..but sweet Jesus you have some sick Mother-F*ckers over there, how the hell can these people call themselves Christians...IMHO these people have committed many crimes just by being on this planet...they make me sick to my stomach.
Jan
-
No offence to my friends who live in the States..but sweet Jesus you have some sick Mother-F*ckers over there, how the hell can these people call themselves Christians...IMHO these people have committed many crimes just by being on this planet...they make me sick to my stomach.
Jan
No offense taken as far as Im concerned . You are correct , they are sick f*ckers and this group has been at it for a long while now . The far right lost they're mind the day our president was elected and things have gone from bad to much worse . The only thing surprising about all this to me that it took this long to happen .
-
True enough, this thread has been hijacked, for my part in that I'll apologize. Being in the off topic area, a little of that is to be expected I think. This forum is simply a microcosm of the same debate taking place in the media.
-
Jan Brewer lied about her nazi-fighting heroic father.
Jan Brewer lied about headless bodies in the desert.
Jan Brewer was elected despite these bald faced lies, because a certain electorate in the US wants these bald faced lies.
Yes, she has created quite the state of bigotry and hatred, but that's another subject. But have you taken a good look at this woman? She's another one that apparently views the world through the bottom of a Whiskey bottle. I wonder if they had to pull her out of happy hour yesterday , so she could make her statement. And John Boehner, with all that blubbering. Another one that hits the bottle. This is only my opinion But I digress.... It's a fucking crazy ass world out there.
Ray
-
I'm sure you can understand what a "responsible gun owner" is. it's not that hard. ;) For brevity sake - a responsible gun owner is one that owns a gun and does not kill people with it.
Yes I do. A "responsible" gun owner is not only someone who would never use or even contemplate to use his/her guns to harm innocent people under any circumstances; he/she will take measures to prevent that from happening and also make sure the guns they own or under their possession to be used by anyone else to do the same. If a "responsible" gun owner begins to realize that he/she maybe at the risk of being unstable himself/herself, he/she would have taken steps to even prevent himself/herself from having access to the guns they own.
What your definition of a "responsible gun owner" is just someone, at best, who's yet to use the guns to commit a crime.
-
In my opinion, this national tragedy is a direct result of the hateful discourse by Palin, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, Tea Party, Right-wing Republicans, etc. Lock and load, revolution, 2nd Amendment references, comments that their political opponents are trying to destroy America are all phrases used by these lunatics that incIte hatred, violence, disrespect for the office of the President, and discrimination. God save the USA and the President from these Palin crazies. Pray for the Giffords, other victims of this attack on America, true American patriots, and for a return to respectful political discourse without personal attacks.
-
Really,... That surprises me,.. Basic cable here in Pinellas County ( which is also conservative) Shows MSNBC , on Brighthouse basic and Fios basic. HHHMMMmmmmmm... Where you at? Ft Myers or Naples?
And Edfu , thanks for sharing the Olberman clip. Somehow I missed it. Fell asleep.
Ray
It is the Port Charlotte/Englewood area. They have Comcast cable, which I thought was buying NBC. So, it was strange to me that they would block MSNBC. I have this device called a Slingbox that allows you to watch your home DVR/TIVO from any computer or your phone anywhere around the world. So, I've been doing that. I refuse to watch FOX.
Back on the tragedy, all my conservative friends on facebook are saying we "liberals" are going overboard on this. One suggested I am probably blaming Sarah for the Colts losing. They just don't get it.
-
In my opinion, this national tragedy is a direct result of the hateful discourse by Palin, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, Tea Party, Right-wing Republicans, etc. Lock and load, revolution, 2nd Amendment references, comments that their political opponents are trying to destroy America are all phrases used by these lunatics that incIte hatred, violence, disrespect for the office of the President, and discrimination. God save the USA and the President from these Palin crazies. Pray for the Giffords, other victims of this attack on America, true American patriots, and for a return to respectful political discourse without personal attacks.
You don't think his Mental Health had anything to do with it. ::)
-
You don't think his Mental Health had anything to do with it. ::)
Of course it did -- but diatribes fall on the ears of the sane and the insane unlike. Unfortuately only the sane are able to properly analyze it.
Having said that -- the lunatic right does not have a monopoly on this overblown rhetoric. The lunatic left does it too. Just so happens that this time it appears that noise coming from the right found an unbalanced mind that fed off it -- to these tragic ends.
So, I would be shocked if you really, honestly felt that things like Palin's gun-sight map didn't have a roll in this guys thought process. Of course, I expect you to say you don't, but I won't believe it.
Mike
-
i've read through all his ramblings, he doesn't seem right wing at all to me, quite the opposite, seems extremely leftist
he was mentally unstable, and had shown many signs of it in the past, and it seems clear that someone should have seen that he was recently on a downward spriral
i think both sides have co-opted this story for political leverage, i dont think he was influenced by anything said by either side, other than the lunatic voices in his head
Of course it did -- but diatribes fall on the ears of the sane and the insane unlike. Unfortuately only the sane are able to properly analyze it.
Having said that -- the lunatic right does not have a monopoly on this overblown rhetoric. The lunatic left does it too. Just so happens that this time it appears that noise coming from the right found an unbalanced mind that fed off it -- to these tragic ends.
So, I would be shocked if you really, honestly felt that things like Palin's gun-sight map didn't have a roll in this guys thought process. Of course, I expect you to say you don't, but I won't believe it.
Mike
-
The whole problem is, if no one mentioned it yet, is that there are a lot of nut cases walking around. People that look perfectly normal for the most part. People that for the most part just slime through life living in their own little distorted fantasy world. What wakes them up and motivates them to violence, in my opinion, are people like Rush Limbaugh and so many others on the airwaves that say the most harmful outlandish things, only to get ratings. Knowing too well they have an unstable listening audience that follows their every word, that they play up to.
I'm just waiting for the time these people, the motivators, are finally held accountable and pay for their part in the violence.
Freedom of speech is one thing, but falsely yelling fire in a crowded theater is another.
The latter is just what talk show hosts, like the slime Rush Limbaugh, is doing.
And they get away with it every time, with no accountability.
-
i've read through all his ramblings, he doesn't seem right wing at all to me, quite the opposite, seems extremely leftist
he was mentally unstable, and had shown many signs of it in the past, and it seems clear that someone should have seen that he was recently on a downward spriral
i think both sides have co-opted this story for political leverage, i dont think he was influenced by anything said by either side, other than the lunatic voices in his head
I have to basically agree with you here, although he does not seem to me to be either firmly on the left or the right. His views seem to be a jumble of both sides - evidenced by his liking of both Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto.
As someone on the outside looking in (meaning I'm not immersed in the American media), it looks like this kid is suffering from schizophrenia. He's got pretty much all the classic symptoms and he's the right age for it to come to a head in such a tragic way.
It is REALLY tempting to blame it all on the Sarah Palins of this world, but I think that is not the case here. This kid is sick, and that's the end of it. He was railing against government in general, not Giffords specifically. He could have been living anywhere and the outcome would have been similar - unless of course if he lived in a place like the UK where it is so much more difficult to get your hands on a gun.
In my opinion, the focus here should be more on what is being done to ensure the mentally ill in society are taken care of so they are not a danger to themselves and/or others instead of making it into a political circus. For heaven's sake, he was booted from his college because it was feared he was a danger to himself or others, he was rejected from the army (my guess is he didn't pass the psychological tests - and that's pretty scary considering who was administering the tests), and yet he got a gun permit?
Wow.
Oh, and another thing.... he lived with his parents. How could they not notice that something was amiss? They should be held culpable too.
-
There is a false equivalence between left and right that is tossed around in situations like this. That left and right are equally responsible for incendiary rhetoric. Someone please give me an example of a Fox news on the left. Or Sarah Palin, the tea party, Beck, Limbaugh, Coulter or the Family Research Council. Give me examples of progressives who dehumanize gays, women and minorities. Deny the vitriol that is spewed out by the right on a daily basis. You can't, and you can't create a false left right equivalence.
-
Oh, and another thing.... he lived with his parents. How could they not notice that something was amiss? They should be held culpable too.
Especially since in the back yard there was an alter with candles and a human skulll.
As regarding what caused this I think it is a combination of a crazy kid, Arizona gun laws and the heated rhetoric used by politicians and talking heads.
-
Having said that -- the lunatic right does not have a monopoly on this overblown rhetoric. The lunatic left does it too.
And, I must assume, you find that the intensity level is exactly the same on both sides? You know, like people running for office on the left side threatening to rub out opponents with gun violence?
OK.
It's nice and fun to make equivalencies bocker (the media does it all of the time), but the difference is that on the right the "lunatic" portion has actually taken over the Republican party. On the left it's confined to bloggers and forum comments.
-
June 14, 2008 “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said in Philadelphia last night. “Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
Just saying, there are enough teachable moments here to go around the table a few times. For the record, I voted for him. It is not confined just to bloggers, it goes all the way up.
And, I must assume, you find that the intensity level is exactly the same on both sides? You know, like people running for office on the left side threatening to rub out opponents with gun violence?
OK.
It's nice and fun to make equivalencies bocker (the media does it all of the time), but the difference is that on the right the "lunatic" portion has actually taken over the Republican party. On the left it's confined to bloggers and forum comments.
-
I would agree he is probably schizo.
and its not clear hes "right" or "left" though the news has said that FBI has linked him to right hate groups.
Most of the bizarre ramblings - if they could be put in a camp - seem to be more in the right field, unless one considers that Libertarianism is rather often considered far left. Its so far left it meets the far right, as in the case of Tea Partiers who can include both extremes occasionally.
I don't think we should let the "Medium" Right off the hook for their incendiary media campaigns - its perfectly possible this creates the atmosphere in which a crazy person feels entitled to his "reality" reshaping actions
The point about Palins gun sites is NOT to say she caused this, anymore than Marilyn Manson was ready to take the rap for Columbine. Its rather to point out the gross concurrence of supposedly sane, responsible rhetoric (Palin was ACTUALLY a VP Candidate) and insane thoughts (nut cases, hate groups).
-
It appears that Daniel Hernandez, the 20 year old intern that helped to save Rep. Giffords life was only on the job 5 days, is Latino, and openly gay. Many are calling him a hero.
Several reports here:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_01/027452.php
http://www.lgbtpov.com/2011/01/gay-latino-intern-credited-with-helping-save-rep-giffords-life/
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/man-who-saved-rep-giffords-life-is-openly-gay/
-
June 14, 2008 “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said in Philadelphia last night. “Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
Just saying, there are enough teachable moments here to go around the table a few times. For the record, I voted for him. It is not confined just to bloggers, it goes all the way up.
Yes you're right. Obama is the epitome of not trying to find compromise with the other side. His left wing hate speech is legendary.
-
And to Ann's point about the gunman's parents--where are they now? I suspect that they are in hiding.
-
June 14, 2008 “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said in Philadelphia last night. “Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
Just saying, there are enough teachable moments here to go around the table a few times. For the record, I voted for him. It is not confined just to bloggers, it goes all the way up.
I don't think you're getting my point -- if you can dig up (hypothetically) one example of such talk on the left, and I dig up 20 on the right, are you still willing to make equivalencies to argue a point? That's what I was saying.
And, of course, context is important -- the "left base" isn't known for having multitudes of NRA supporters showing up at political events with guns. Well, unless you believe the Fox News propaganda that the party of hippies, baby killers and cocksuckers have been taken over by Black Panthers.
Next thing someone will convince me of the existence of numerous left wing militia groups around the country.
-
There is a false equivalence between left and right that is tossed around in situations like this. That left and right are equally responsible for incendiary rhetoric. Someone please give me an example of a Fox news on the left. Or Sarah Palin, the tea party, Beck, Limbaugh, Coulter or the Family Research Council. Give me examples of progressives who dehumanize gays, women and minorities. Deny the vitriol that is spewed out by the right on a daily basis. You can't, and you can't create a false left right equivalence.
]
Christ I thought the day would never come, we agree on something.
Also
I have to basically agree with you here, although he does not seem to me to be either firmly on the left or the right. His views seem to be a jumble of both sides - evidenced by his liking of both Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto.
As someone on the outside looking in (meaning I'm not immersed in the American media), it looks like this kid is suffering from schizophrenia. He's got pretty much all the classic symptoms and he's the right age for it to come to a head in such a tragic way.
It is REALLY tempting to blame it all on the Sarah Palins of this world, but I think that is not the case here. This kid is sick, and that's the end of it. He was railing against government in general, not Giffords specifically. He could have been living anywhere and the outcome would have been similar - unless of course if he lived in a place like the UK where it is so much more difficult to get your hands on a gun.
In my opinion, the focus here should be more on what is being done to ensure the mentally ill in society are taken care of so they are not a danger to themselves and/or others instead of making it into a political circus. For heaven's sake, he was booted from his college because it was feared he was a danger to himself or others, he was rejected from the army (my guess is he didn't pass the psychological tests - and that's pretty scary considering who was administering the tests), and yet he got a gun permit?
Wow.
Oh, and another thing.... he lived with his parents. How could they not notice that something was amiss? They should be held culpable too.
This is right on the money in my opinion. This isn't actually about gun control aside from the fact that someone who was so obviously mentally ill should never have even been let in the door much less allowed to actually buy a gun. This isn't so much about political rhetoric except that what you and I see as fiery political speech is seen by the crazies of the world as an impassioned speech galvanizing them into action. This is about one crazy motherfucker who decided it was his job to take matters into his own hands and the result is truly a tragedy. I don't think this could have been prevented with any amount of legislation, unfortunately.
-
The high-capacity magazine of the semiautomatic pistol used in the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and more than a dozen other people on Saturday would have been illegal to manufacture and difficult to purchase under the Clinton-era assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004.
-
Of course it did -- but diatribes fall on the ears of the sane and the insane unlike. Unfortuately only the sane are able to properly analyze it.
Having said that -- the lunatic right does not have a monopoly on this overblown rhetoric. The lunatic left does it too. Just so happens that this time it appears that noise coming from the right found an unbalanced mind that fed off it -- to these tragic ends.
So, I would be shocked if you really, honestly felt that things like Palin's gun-sight map didn't have a roll in this guys thought process. Of course, I expect you to say you don't, but I won't believe it.
Mike
I hope you are joking?
-
The high-capacity magazine of the semiautomatic pistol used in the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and more than a dozen other people on Saturday would have been illegal to manufacture and difficult to purchase under the Clinton-era assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004.
you're cute when you troll ;) i'm teasing of course
-
you're cute when you troll ;)
The statement Dachs made is a fact , not a troll statement by any definition .
-
Absolutely true. If the assault ban had not expired under Bush, he in all probability would have had a cartridge only capable of holding 10 bullets, not 30 (33? I've heard both). It was only after he emptied the first cartridge and was reloading that someone wrestled him to the ground. Ending his rampage.
Ironically, when I logged in, what was the ad at the very top of the page?
An ad for a "sniper scope" on sale for $99.99. Yee Gawd!
RAB
-
As my friends here know I know nothing about Politics, especially American Politics..Right, Left, mean nothing to me, but I always thought that someone who was so steeped in Poitics and the believes of their own party were called Fanatic's:
Definition of Fanatical: ..Excessive enthusiasm to a cause or idea.
Definition of Lunatic: ..afflicted with or exhibiting and irrational and mental unsoundness.
From what we have read so far about this man has nothing to do with Politics, he wasn't fighting for any cause, the only thing he was fighting was his own demons, he has shown quite a few signs of being mentally unstable...he was a Lunatic,...and one that obviously needed a great deal of help, he was not a fanatical, so this has nothing to do with Politics has it.
Burning candles and Skulls in the garden, come on,..is this what Political extremist's do over in the States?
Jan
-
As my friends here know I know nothing about Politics, especially American Politics..Right, Left, mean nothing to me, but I always thought that someone who was so steeped in Poitics and the believes of their own party were called Fanatic's:
Definition of Fanatical: ..Excessive enthusiasm to a cause or idea.
Definition of Lunatic: ..afflicted with or exhibiting and irrational and mental unsoundness.
From what we have read so far about this man has nothing to do with Politics, he wasn't fighting for any cause, the only thing he was fighting was his own demons, he has shown quite a few signs of being mentally unstable...he was a Lunatic,...and one that obviously needed a great deal of help, he was not a fanatical, so this has nothing to do with Politics has it.
Burning candles and Skulls in the garden, come on,..is this what Political extremist's do over in the States?
Jan
You are right Jan, I don't think any of us have suggested he was fighting for a cause. I don't think any of us are overlooking the fact that clearly this man was mentally unstable.
I certainly don't perceive him as being a political extremist, beyond the fact thathe hated government, and even felt that the school he was attending was unconstitutional.
However, given all of that, I think that the vitriol from the right, "don't retreat, reload", crosshairs on a map targeting certain elected officials (One of whom was Gifford), could have (in my opinion, probably did) play a role in motivating him to do what he did.
We probably will never know for sure. But the fact he was mentally unstable is clearly the primary issue, the question remains, were there other mitigating factors?
RAB
-
Burning candles and Skulls in the garden, come on,..is this what Political extremist's do over in the States?
Jan
Unless he was a follower of Christine O'Donnell of Delaware.... :) (what's another hijack on a thread that has journeyed across as wide a plain as I have seen in a very long time)
-
Absolutely true. If the assault ban had not expired under Bush, he in all probability would have had a cartridge only capable of holding 10 bullets, not 30 (33? I've heard both). It was only after he emptied the first cartridge and was reloading that someone wrestled him to the ground. Ending his rampage.
Ironically, when I logged in, what was the ad at the very top of the page?
An ad for a "sniper scope" on sale for $99.99. Yee Gawd!
RAB
Rab it's called a clip or magazine, you city slicker you. ;)
-
i really didn't wanna point this out
they were called pre ban hi cap mags ;D
i think i've still got a stash buried behind my garden, just in case ;-)
folks, this tragedy was beyond comprehension, and there were plenty of red flags he should not have been issued a firearms permit, but responsible gun owners are shouldn't take the fall for it
-
And, I must assume, you find that the intensity level is exactly the same on both sides? You know, like people running for office on the left side threatening to rub out opponents with gun violence?
OK.
It's nice and fun to make equivalencies bocker (the media does it all of the time), but the difference is that on the right the "lunatic" portion has actually taken over the Republican party. On the left it's confined to bloggers and forum comments.
Yes, the intensity is the same -- the intensity of demonization of the other side. Now, I'm not saying the words are the same, or the threats -- but one can't have a CIVIL DISCUSSION with members of either side. The "I'm right and you are evil." attitude that permeates most political discussions (even, on these very forums) is what feeds those who go even further and start to level threats of bodily harm.
I can remember many folks wishing George W. dead, although, I will agree with you that the far right is far more prone to this sort of thing, because they like to wrap it up with gun ownership.
Finally, I know that you are intelligent, Miss P -- you should be able to read a post and grasp at a concept over a full blown verbatim reading. Although, I never claimed "equivalence" -- I said that neither side has a monopoly on overheated rhetoric and I'll stand by that.
Mike
-
but responsible gun owners are shouldn't take the fall for it
We have extremely strict gun laws here in NZ, my husband and I have a .243 and a .22 for hunting, actually I have never fired mine, except for target practice on my own property.
We are not allowed to own a pistol or any other type of fire arm for that matter..they can be obtained illegally of course, but if you don't have big bucks you are not going to get one, we can't just simply walk into a shop and buy a rifle without a clearance certificate.
Aroha
Jan :-*
-
John Aravosis, of Americablog.com, on Roger Ailes's claim that "both sides do it":
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fascinating notion that "both sides do it." Did our vice presidential candidate, Joe Biden, take down a bullseye he had drawn on the districts of GOP members of Congress? Where is the Vice President's bullseye, like GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's bullseye, if both sides do it?
What Ailes means is that the leadership of the GOP, and their propaganda organ, do "it" all the time - "it" meaning "cross the line of decency" - whereas the occasional person on the left, usually an anonymous commenter on a blog, are the ones who do "it" on the Democratic side. On our side it tends to be an abberation. On their side, the abberation is elevated to the leadership of the party, given its own show on FOX News, or both.
The Republican party, and American conservatives, have a fetish for violent imagery in words and pictures. It's why Republicans think it funny that their supporters bring guns to Obama rallies. It's why Glenn Beck can claim on FOX News that President Obama plans to eliminate 10% of the US population in some kind of genocide, and Beck still keeps his job. It's why Sarah Palin (the woman who coined the phrase "death panels" - suggesting that Democrats, and our president at the lead, had a plot to kill millions of elderly Americans for sport - a ridiculous, and incendiary, notion that was embraced by the leadership of the Republican party and its propaganda organ, FOX News) can put bullseyes on the districts of Democratic members of Congress, and even tell her followers to "lock and reload," and all the Republicans laugh at how funny the violent imagery and words are.
We on the left have been complaining for years about the right's embrace of violence, and how its rhetoric feeds America's already out of control violent culture. There is nothing opportunistic about continuing to express that concern when a congresswoman is almost assassinated (and a federal judge and a 9 year old girl are assassinated) after Sarah Palin put a bullseye on the woman's district - and refuses to remove the bullseye after the congresswoman expresses the concern that someone may take it as an exhortation to violence.
Has the right been constantly bemoaning a left-wing leadership embrace of violence, and somehow we all missed it?
Anyone who has visited Europe, Western Europe in particular, and especially those of us who have lived there, know all too well how unique America's culture of violence is. In European capitals you generally don't worry about walking home alone at 1, even 3, in the morning through deserted neighborhoods. Try that in Washington, DC. And if you do get robbed in Europe, odds are you won't be hurt. In Washington, odds are you'll be shot, knifed, or hit in the head - or in my case, they'll simply try to strangle you to death on a busy street, in a nice neighborhood, at 8 o'clock in the evening.
Yes, we live in a great country. And it has a serious problem with violence. Rather than acknowledging the problem, and steering clear of tempting the metaphorical drunk, as it were, our conservative friends try to tap into the violence, in the hopes it will propel them to victory at the ballot box.
There is no left-wing NRA. There is no vice presidential candidate on the Democratic side who puts bullseyes on the districts of members of Congress he doesn't like. And there is no Republican presidential nominee who has seen a spike in death threats in part because of the ramblings of the other team's noise machine and its elected officials.
When you tell people that Democrats in Congress, and the White House, are planning to institute death panels to kill their grandmother, how do you expect them to respond - with roses?
There aren't two sides to the Republicans' embrace of guns, violence, and angry mobs. It's all theirs. And it's time the media stopped pretending otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------
-
No offence to my friends who live in the States..but sweet Jesus you have some sick Mother-F*ckers over there, how the hell can these people call themselves Christians...IMHO these people have committed many crimes just by being on this planet...they make me sick to my stomach.
Jan
It is these types of Christians that drove me to become a Pagan.
My this thread has gone all over the place.
HUGS,
Mark
-
I'm fed up with the conservative and tea party movement here in the states . Let us never forget they are the ones who gave a wink and nod to supporters who showed up at political rallies with guns , they are the ones who painted targets on there opponents backs and told there supporters to take back power by any means necessary , they are the ones who supported gays serving honorably losing there carriers and they are the ones still doing everything they possibly can to deny gay Americans they're civil rights .
Conservatives are solely to blame for the current poison political climate in this country , all the liberals can be accused of is trying to defend themselves .
-
i really didn't wanna point this out
they were called pre ban hi cap mags ;D
i think i've still got a stash buried behind my garden, just in case ;-)
folks, this tragedy was beyond comprehension, and there were plenty of red flags he should not have been issued a firearms permit, but responsible gun owners are shouldn't take the fall for it
Zach
Here's the part I don't get. How can anyone who owns a working semiautomatic pistol claim to be a "responsible gun owner"?
They aren't good for hunting.
They go far beyond anything one would need for self defense against any one or two individuals.
The reasons people seem to cite for owning them is that they are "fun to shoot" or "look cool". But those are hardly responsible attitudes towards deadly armory.
I grew up with rifles and shotguns, went hunting with my Dad and all that. But I just don't get why these count as guns that responsible gun owners defend.
A
-
Add these examples to edfu's excellent sited article;
Maryland Democratic Rep. Frank Kratovil hung in effigy in July 2009
MO Congressman Russ Carnahan burnt in effigy March 2010
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida opponent invited supporters to shoot guns at a target with DWS written across the target Oct 2009
And tonight FBI arrests a man for threatening the lives of staff of Sen Micheal Bennett of Colorado
I agree that rhetoric on both sides and especially that of tv/radio talking heads and bloggers. But I don't see the left going to such extremes as listed above
-
Everybody does it ::)
-
Zach
Here's the part I don't get. How can anyone who owns a working semiautomatic pistol claim to be a "responsible gun owner"?
They aren't good for hunting.
They go far beyond anything one would need for self defense against any one or two individuals.
The reasons people seem to cite for owning them is that they are "fun to shoot" or "look cool". But those are hardly responsible attitudes towards deadly armory.
I grew up with rifles and shotguns, went hunting with my Dad and all that. But I just don't get why these count as guns that responsible gun owners defend.
A
Protection and Pistol shooting competitions. It's a sport just like any other sport, until you use it for unintented purposes then it goes criminal, like in Tucson. Cars are the same until you decide to drive one into a group of people and you never know when some derainged person is going to do it. We don't ban cars because some jerk drove into a crowd of people.
-
Protection and Pistol shooting competitions. It's a sport just like any other sport, until you use it for unintented purposes then it goes criminal, like in Tucson. Cars are the same until you decide to drive one into a group of people and you never know when some derainged person is going to do it. We don't ban cars because some jerk drove into a crowd of people.
But cars have a non-racing purpose. There are responsible uses -- in fact most uses are responsible. And race cars are not used in terrorism and crime the way semiautomatic pistols are.
These weapons (semi-automatic pistols) have zero non-recreational peacetime uses.
None
It is not responsible to defend keeping them legal if they are frequently used in crime and terrorism and they have solely recreational peacetime uses.
-
Protection and Pistol shooting competitions. It's a sport just like any other sport, until you use it for unintented purposes then it goes criminal, like in Tucson. Cars are the same until you decide to drive one into a group of people and you never know when some derainged person is going to do it. We don't ban cars because some jerk drove into a crowd of people.
I wonder how many people have been killed by those crazies driving cars into crowds and how many people have been killed by a nut opening fire in a crowd or school?
I can't understand whats wrong with some training and background checks for gun owners, obviously the Gov of AZ and its legislature don't agree as she just signed on Friday legislation that will allow people 21 or older to forego background checks and classes that are now required.
-
These car analogies just do not ring true. In order to become a licensed driver, one must attend classes and pass not only a written, but also a practical test. In order to become a licensed gun owner, all you have to do is not have a criminal record.
INfuckingSANE. Scandalous.
-
point taken
I can only speak for myself. I didn't have handguns until I was in the military. And although I have a concealed carry permit, I never have, they are always in a safe. I'll just say that maybe I've been too vocal in this thread. And bow out with a salute to Colonel Badger.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/heroes-rep-gabrielle-giffords-shooting-tucson-arizona-subdued/story?id=12580345
-
I wonder how many people have been killed by those crazies driving cars into crowds and how many people have been killed by a nut opening fire in a crowd or school?
I can't understand whats wrong with some training and background checks for gun owners, obviously the Gov of AZ and its legislature don't agree as she just signed on Friday legislation that will allow people 21 or older to forego background checks and classes that are now required.
Google it and you find plenty of articles where people ran down people with cars.
-
Google it and you find plenty of articles where people ran down people with cars.
These car analogies just do not ring true. In order to become a licensed driver, one must attend classes and pass not only a written, but also a practical test. In order to become a licensed gun owner, all you have to do is not have a criminal record. INfuckingSANE. Scandalous.
Duh. ::)
-
These car analogies just do not ring true. In order to become a licensed driver, one must attend classes and pass not only a written, but also a practical test. In order to become a licensed gun owner, all you have to do is not have a criminal record. INfuckingSANE. Scandalous.
Really? What makes the difference if you have training or not if you want to kill a bunch of people with a gun or a car? Does the training just make you a better killer? It's criminal all the way and most people aren't criminals and wouldn't think of doing such a thing.
-
Video of responsible gun owners having fun at the gun range:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vPnMbLr5nc
-
When it comes to gun control those of us who favor extremely strict laws will never win out because we always run up against our opponents use of the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. And goodness knows if it was written 230 yrs or so ago it applies today. However at least somewhere along the way sane minds realized that you can't count a person as 3/5 of a person and changed that. Some smart people also realized what a mistake the 18th amendment was and repealed that. And let's not forget that when The Constitution was read in Congress last week someone decided not to include all of it in the reading.
-
The analogy to a car is quite a stretch.
First, it fails simply by the names. Things have names to describe what they do.
A race car is for racing. If used irresponsibly it endangers primarily the driver and secondarily those who have come to watch the race. Third parties are rarely at risk.
A semiautomatic assault weapon has a primary use of assaulting others. While it can be used for recreation, that is not the primary (named) purpose. If used irresponsibly it endangers primarily others who did not intend to have anything to do with the object.
A better analogy might be nuclear tipped missiles. I bet they are a blast to set up and explode (in more senses of the word than one). But they have no non-recreational peacetime use. Their primary (named) purpose is to serve as a missile. If used irresponsibly they primarily endanger third parties who were not interested in being involved in exploding them.
Do you agree it is irresponsible to sell nuclear tipped missiles at gun shows and to hobbyists?
-
sigh
(http://i1007.photobucket.com/albums/af197/bedstuy65/Glenn_Beck_website_gun.jpg)
-
The analogy to a car is quite a stretch.
First, it fails simply by the names. Things have names to describe what they do.
A race car is for racing. If used irresponsibly it endangers primarily the driver and secondarily those who have come to watch the race. Third parties are rarely at risk.
A semiautomatic assault weapon has a primary use of assaulting others. While it can be used for recreation, that is not the primary (named) purpose. If used irresponsibly it endangers primarily others who did not intend to have anything to do with the object.
A better analogy might be nuclear tipped missiles. I bet they are a blast to set up and explode (in more senses of the word than one). But they have no non-recreational peacetime use. Their primary (named) purpose is to serve as a missile. If used irresponsibly they primarily endanger third parties who were not interested in being involved in exploding them.
Do you agree it is irresponsible to sell nuclear tipped missiles at gun shows and to hobbyists?
Nuclear weapons aren't sold at gun shows. ) Is that your analogy?
-
Nuclear weapons aren't sold at gun shows. ) Is that your analogy?
It's a better analogy than cars.
-
Here's the part I don't get. How can anyone who owns a working semiautomatic pistol claim to be a "responsible gun owner"?
They go far beyond anything one would need for self defense against any one or two individuals.
I own a 9mm semi pistol. Have had it for 16 years. Am I not a responsible Gun owner?
Why do I have it? for personal protection in my home. I prefer it over my 38 which only holds 5 rounds. Do I not have the right to have a rapid fire pistol which can hold 16 rounds in my home to defend myself against what some of the thugs here in SA have illegally?
-Will
-
I'd almost bet money that I've lived in more dangerous environments for the past 25 years than most anyone here and yet I've never felt the need to go buy a gun.
-
It's a better analogy than cars.
.. and wait for the corkscrew analogy coming to a forum near you soon..
-
I'd almost bet money that I've lived in more dangerous environments for the past 25 years than most anyone here and yet I've never felt the need to go buy a gun.
You and me both, sweetie. I don't even own a slingshot nor would I want to.
Hell, I used to score drugs in Spanish Harlem as well as the South Bronx. Gun? No need.
-
I'd almost bet money that I've lived in more dangerous environments for the past 25 years than most anyone here and yet I've never felt the need to go buy a gun.
Well that's great P. But how by owning a semi am I not a "responsible gun owner" as Assurb pronounces?
-
I own a 9mm semi pistol. Have had it for 16 years. Am I not a responsible Gun owner?
Why do I have it? for personal protection in my home. I prefer it over my 38 which only holds 5 rounds. Do I not have the right to have a rapid fire pistol which can hold 16 rounds in my home to defend myself against what some of the thugs here in SA have illegally?
-Will
That is a difficult argument to make. Why do you need a semiautomatic weapon that fires 30 rounds? Are 5 rounds insufficient to protect you against your fears? If you live in such a dangerous neighborhood perhaps you should move or hire guards. I don't think you are entitled to install a machine gun nest or buy nuclear tipped missiles just because you are afraid.
And if the bad guys didn't have semiautomatic weapons freely available to them would you feel more safe?
One could go on and on arguendo Where would you draw the line between responsible weapons and irresponsible gun ownership?
I suppose my argument boils down to this. If someone is incapable of drawing a line between responsible and irresponsible categories of guns for private ownership, it rather takes that person out of the "responsible gun owner" category (because s/he has adopted a definition that makes the word "responsible" irrelevant).
Edits .... Can spell, can't type, doesn't always spell check
-
I suppose my argument boils down to this. If someone is incapable of drawing a line between responsible and irresponsible categories of guns for private ownership, it rather takes that person out of the "responsible gun owner" category (because s/he has adopted a definition that makes the word "responsible" irreleveant).
Yup.
-
.. and wait for the corkscrew analogy coming to a forum near you soon..
fuckin dammit!! I was just about to say.....
-
That is a difficult argument to make. Why do you need a semiautomic weapon that fires 30 rounds?
Reread my post, my clip holds 16 rounds not 30. Btw, I am absolutely for a renewal of the ban outlawing high capacity clips
Are 5 rounds insufficent to protect you against your fears?
Thats correct, 5 rounds cannot compete with a semiauto that holds 15-30 which is the gun of choice for the home invading thugs, and as a responsible gun owner I have a right to choose a gun that I am comfortable with.
I wont go into your petty "fear" BS and installing nuclear weapons or whatever.
And if the bad guys didn't have semiautomatic weapons freely available to them would you feel more safe?
If you aluding to the gun control issue , If you think "bad guys" wouldnt have guns even with strict gun control you are living in a fantasy world.
Basically you are throwing down this threshold of whether or not a person owns a revolver or a semi pistol to decide whether or not a person is a "Responsible gun owner". Is it not a persons state of mind that would be more in line with determining whether a person is a responsible gun owner? Can a person who owns a revolver who leaves it out for his children to play with be considered a "Responsible gun owner"? I think not. It is all about the mindset and respect for the weapon and respect for the knolwedge of what harm that weapon can do regardless whether it is a revovler or a semi.
W
-
In the America I envision, this is what would have occurred this morning.
Congress would assemble on the steps of the Capital, with President Obama stating that all members of Congress had demanded the following:
That political discourse was sacrosanct and could only truly exist in a respectful and save environment. Therefore, both political parties have agreed that no longer will vitriol and suggested violence, against any individual or group be tolerated. They will insist that each and every member of Congress, who has ever promoted, or even suggested violence against any group, for any reason, to repudiate those actions, or be removed from Congress immediately.
Acknowledging the nature of the latest tragedy, Congress would announce a major overhaul of the mental health care system in America and pledge appropriate funding to assure adequate care.
Congress would instruct various federal agencies to clean up the airwaves. To do this, anyone in the radio and TV media, would immediately need to repudiate their own suggestions of violence, against any individual or group, or lose their license to broadcast.
Congress would declare that gun violence has reached epidemic proportions in America and declare a state of national emergency. Legislation would be devised, restricting the sale of assault weapons and all automatic weapons to the military, state militias and law enforcement. The federal law would be imposed in all 50 states, no exceptions.
Finally, on behalf of Congress, President Obama would apologize to the American people, for the sorry state of affairs that has developed, because Congress had forgotten exactly who they represent.
Lastly and most important, Congress would ban all political contributions, for campaigning and create a federal election fund, that would be mandatory for any candidate for public office in America.
That's what should happen.
-
I'm just glad we are having this conversation online and not face to face.... The Wumpster has me kinda scared right now.
-
I'm just glad we are having this conversation online and not face to face.... The Wumpster has me kinda scared right now.
Oh please, I am a lovable little kitten. Just dont break down my door in the middle of the night or I gonna cap you azz/
-W
-
Hell, I used to score drugs in Spanish Harlem as well as the South Bronx. Gun? No need.
Been there, done that -- of course, I had a Dominican with me for guidance, protection and sexual healing:)
-
If you aluding to the gun control issue , If you think "bad guys" wouldnt have guns even with strict gun control you are living in a fantasy world.
I often find this argument very limp. In countries where there are strict gun laws, only really hardcore organized and gang-type criminals have the means to obtain guns. They use guns for "bigger" jobs (like bank robberies, etc) and violence against each other. So guns don't usually find their ways to lesser "thugs" for home invading purposes. And in countries with very strict gun control, like in Hong Kong, the penalty of simply possessing guns is often higher than committing small crimes like robbery. The costs (not just for obtaining guns, but also the consequences of being caught) are simply too high.
It doesn't mean of course we have fewer crimes here, but surely we have a lot less involving guns, and in turn none of us would ever think it's necessary to own guns for protection. We just go buy and install some extra locks.
-
Supreme goddess (and AIDS activist) Rachel Maddow helps us remember some past U.S. shooting massacres. Tragically, as is evident even from this thread alone, we are still condemned to repeat the past.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1MrT3O-TBg
-
Nothing to see here folks (http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/republican-rhetoric-right-wing-terror), just move on along...
-
Obama's visit and memorial address in Arizona.
I dunno, fine enough to pay respects. Make some concise insightful comments to the press.
I think Obama milked his memorial address a bit too much, for politics. He looked smug. The speech was too "lofty" and statesmanlike, yet with frequent ill-making moments of familiarity with the injured and slain, calling them by their first names - huh? I don't know these people and certainly don't know their first names - listing all their qualities, etc. He used way too many "our"s and "we"s.
I felt Obama and his speech writers trying to manipulate me into a common goal - that was the "style" of the rhetoric but also the content of the presidential address - that finally I felt LESS unity, after listening to him. I don't understand why he made it such a pompous address with the Presidential Seal etc etc. Why didn't he go, pay his respects, obviously be photographed doing so, and make a short formal statement. Somehow it seemed more about him being presidential than the dead.
If it was the random nihilistic work of a nut case - and end of story - I don't see why this has to be so "national event"-y.
-
I have to agree Mecch. There were some very moving lines in his speech, but when all was said and done I felt that he was campaigning for reelection. And the Arizona, psycho Governor, whoa.....talk about someone who might need evaluation for mental stability.
-
Obama's visit and memorial address in Arizona.
I dunno, fine enough to pay respects. Make some concise insightful comments to the press.
I think Obama milked his memorial address a bit too much, for politics. He looked smug. The speech was too "lofty" and statesmanlike, yet with frequent ill-making moments of familiarity with the injured and slain, calling them by their first names - huh? I don't know these people and certainly don't know their first names - listing all their qualities, etc. He used way too many "our"s and "we"s.
I felt Obama and his speech writers trying to manipulate me into a common goal - that was the "style" of the rhetoric but also the content of the presidential address - that finally I felt LESS unity, after listening to him. I don't understand why he made it such a pompous address with the Presidential Seal etc etc. Why didn't he go, pay his respects, obviously be photographed doing so, and make a short formal statement. Somehow it seemed more about him being presidential than than the dead.
If it was the random nihilistic work of a nut case - and end of story - I don't see why this has to be so "national event"-y.
Pomposity heal thyself.
-
Obama's visit and memorial address in Arizona.
The speech was too "lofty" and statesmanlike, yet with frequent ill-making moments of familiarity with the injured and slain, calling them by their first names - huh? I don't know these people and certainly don't know their first names - listing all their qualities, etc. He used way too many "our"s and "we"s.
I don't understand why he made it such a pompous address with the Presidential Seal etc etc.
If it was the random nihilistic work of a nut case - and end of story - I don't see why this has to be so "national event"
And what, pray tell, would your speech have sounded like? You are so so right, I mean, why didn't he just refer to the slain as "those people" -- would that have made you happy?
Why a national event? Let's see - a Congresswoman nearly killed and a federal judge murdered.... I think that qualifies.
Seems to me, with someone giving a critique who doesn't even live in the United States that it might even qualify as an international event. Please let OUR President address OUR nation the way he sees fit - let US decide the "appropriateness" of his words and/or appearance.
Oh and the Presidential seal is the appropriate protocol for the President of the United States to stand behind in such a setting.
-
Obama's visit and memorial address in Arizona.
I dunno, fine enough to pay respects. Make some concise insightful comments to the press.
I think Obama milked his memorial address a bit too much, for politics. He looked smug. The speech was too "lofty" and statesmanlike, yet with frequent ill-making moments of familiarity with the injured and slain, calling them by their first names - huh? I don't know these people and certainly don't know their first names - listing all their qualities, etc. He used way too many "our"s and "we"s.
I felt Obama and his speech writers trying to manipulate me into a common goal - that was the "style" of the rhetoric but also the content of the presidential address - that finally I felt LESS unity, after listening to him. I don't understand why he made it such a pompous address with the Presidential Seal etc etc. Why didn't he go, pay his respects, obviously be photographed doing so, and make a short formal statement. Somehow it seemed more about him being presidential than than the dead.
If it was the random nihilistic work of a nut case - and end of story - I don't see why this has to be so "national event"-y.
I have to agree Mecch. There were some very moving lines in his speech, but when all was said and done I felt that he was campaigning for reelection. And the Arizona, psycho Governor, whoa.....talk about someone who might need evaluation for mental stability.
And I have to disagree. I can't believe someone can watch a memorial service and put such focus on our President and his motives.
-
I thought Obama's speech was amazing, (which is rare for me). I thought it served it's purpose, and I kinda felt good in a healing kind of way. He's a great orator, and it showed last night. Yes, there were some awkward applause in the wrong places but I guess whatever.
-W
-
And I have to disagree. I can't believe someone can watch a memorial service and put such focus on our President and his motives.
I'm waiting for Mr. Blackwell's critique of the First Lady's attire to be laid upon us next.....
14,000 in the audience; 13,000 in overflow room; millions watching on TV - and our President didn't point blame - didn't incite anger or hate - but rather provided a tribute to those killed and injured and honored those who were heroes that day.
I agree Skeebo - focusing on what one perceives as the President and his motives when a memorial service is being conducted says more about the character of the person who would do such a thing and post about it in such an arrogant, self-inflated way that more than outshines any motive (real or perceived) that the President may or may not have had during his speech.
-
And what, pray tell, would your speech have sounded like? You are so so right, I mean, why didn't he just refer to the slain as "those people" -- would that have made you happy?
Why a national event? Let's see - a Congresswoman nearly killed and a federal judge murdered.... I think that qualifies.
Seems to me, with someone giving a critique who doesn't even live in the United States that it might even qualify as an international event. Please let OUR President address OUR nation the way he sees fit - let US decide the "appropriateness" of his words and/or appearance.
Oh and the Presidential seal is the appropriate protocol for the President of the United States to stand behind in such a setting.
Fox News said roughly the same thing as the quoted poster. I was (incredibly) even more disgusted with them then before. Smug condescension it a terrible look for a right wing news commentator. It is an equally inappropriate look for someone grappling with a deadly illness.
-
I thought Obama's speech was amazing, (which is rare for me). I thought it served it's purpose, and I kinda felt good in a healing kind of way. He's a great orator, and it showed last night. Yes, there were some awkward applause in the wrong places but I guess whatever.
-W
I agree Will -
I think that there would have been awkwardness no matter who the speaker or what was said -- there is no easy way to deal with a tragedy such as what occurred. I think that the message was hope and support --- rather than understanding (of which there can be none with the event that occurred).
-
Fox News said roughly the same thing as the quoted poster. I was (incredibly) even more disgusted with them then before. Smug condescension it a terrible look for a right wing news commentator. It is an equally inappropriate look for someone grappling with a deadly illness.
Definitely ---I agree completely.
At least we know Fox news' agenda.... the same can't be said for the pomposity of an individual who feels it is his place to judge, rate and assign what he thinks is the appropriate role is and response is for our President.
-
If it was the random nihilistic work of a nut case - and end of story - I don't see why this has to be so "national event"-y.
It is a national event because a member of Congress was nearly assassinated, and in the fracas, others, including a 9-year-old girl and a federal judge, were murdered in cold blood.
It was a national event because the lunatic who committed these acts spewed some anti-government rhetoric, which led some to conclude the guy was fed on the poison being spewed buy the talking heads who appear on what can laughingly be called broadcast news.
It was a national event because it actually led people to question the atmosphere of hate now filling the airwaves and broadsheets.
Perhaps you have lived as an expatriot for too long and haven't been assailed by the hate speech with which we now find ourselves inundated. The septic sewage being spewed has reached toxic levels.
I think President Obama's speech was timely and well done.
For the record, I don't think Loughner was motivated by hate speech, I think he is insane.
But if this tragedy could nudge us into finally admitting there is an atmosphere of hate that surrounds us and, maybe, decide it is not how we wish to live, then perhaps some good can be rescued from this dreadful occurrence.
That is why it is a national event.
-
It is a national event because a member of Congress was nearly assassinated, and in the fracas, others, including a 9-year-old girl and a federal judge, were murdered in cold blood.
It was a national event because the lunatic who committed these acts spewed some anti-government rhetoric, which led some to conclude the guy was fed on the poison being spewed buy the talking heads who appear on what can laughingly be called broadcast news.
It was a national event because it actually led people to question the atmosphere of hate now filling the airwaves and broadsheets.
Perhaps you have lived as an expatriot for too long and haven't been assailed by the hate speech with which we now find ourselves inundated. The septic sewage being spewed has reached toxic levels.
I think President Obama's speech was timely and well done.
For the record, I don't think Loughner was motivated by hate speech, I think he is insane.
But if this tragedy could nudge us into finally admitting there is an atmosphere of hate that surrounds us and, maybe, decide it is not how we wish to live, then perhaps some good can be rescued from this dreadful occurrence.
That is why it is a national event.
Very well said Mark --- Thanks!
-
It is a national event because a member of Congress was nearly assassinated, and in the fracas, others, including a 9-year-old girl and a federal judge, were murdered in cold blood.
It was a national event because the lunatic who committed these acts spewed some anti-government rhetoric, which led some to conclude the guy was fed on the poison being spewed buy the talking heads who appear on what can laughingly be called broadcast news.
It was a national event because it actually led people to question the atmosphere of hate now filling the airwaves and broadsheets.
Perhaps you have lived as an expatriot for too long and haven't been assailed by the hate speech with which we now find ourselves inundated. The septic sewage being spewed has reached toxic levels.
I think President Obama's speech was timely and well done.
For the record, I don't think Loughner was motivated by hate speech, I think he is insane.
But if this tragedy could nudge us into finally admitting there is an atmosphere of hate that surrounds us and, maybe, decide it is not how we wish to live, then perhaps some good can be rescued from this dreadful occurrence.
That is why it is a national event.
BRAVO!!
Mark, there are a few people I've always wanted to meet in person from the forums. Above is just an example why you were always one of them.
-
I'm waiting for Mr. Blackwell's critique of the First Lady's attire to be laid upon us next.....
14,000 in the audience; 13,000 in overflow room; millions watching on TV - and our President didn't point blame - didn't incite anger or hate - but rather provided a tribute to those killed and injured and honored those who were heroes that day.
I agree Skeebo - focusing on what one perceives as the President and his motives when a memorial service is being conducted says more about the character of the person who would do such a thing and post about it in such an arrogant, self-inflated way that more than outshines any motive (real or perceived) that the President may or may not have had during his speech.
You are one transparent, middlebrow flamer.
I subsequently watched my news rounds - Anderson Cooper, Maddow, Slate, etc. and many pundits on left and right analyzed his speech. Making similar observations.
Why dont you put me on ignore since i annoy you so much so personally that you feel compelled to lash out personally every so often - when I dunno, you could STICK TO THE SUBJECT. Oh and your cheap personal criticism is ignorant, by the way. Since I am American and vote in the US, pay taxes, and grew up there.
Ta ta dearie. One too many easy name calling substituting for intelligent debate. Ignored.
-
Oh, and for some of the rest of you. Keep it on subject. Pot kettle????? Some of you hijacked this tread into pretty lame tangents - and hardly respectful - and I didn't call YOU names. At least my posts all through have been on topic.
This speech can be compared to Clinton's 1995 speech after Oklahoma, which buries Obama's in quality and concision. I felt that speech. I didn't feel Obama's here.
http://www.presidentialrhetoric.com/historicspeeches/clinton/oklahomacity.html
Obama's speech had an unfortunate stump speech feeling to it. That's all I'm saying. I don't think he did bad, but it could have been better.
You all love it, feel free! I'm not gonna call you arrogant for your opinions. I have some strange bedfellows in my reaction to this speech, but my reaction was true and hardly unique.
-
Oh, and for some of the rest of you. Keep it on subject. Pot kettle????? Some of you hijacked this tread into pretty lame tangents - and hardly respectful - and I didn't call YOU names. At least my posts all through have been on topic.
Oh please, Mary -- stop your whining. You posted something and people responded. So, if you think they went off topic, it's because you did (I don't think you or they did, BTW).
Everytime people call you out for one of your "on your high horse" rants, you claim victim. Quite frankly, it's tiring. If you really can't see why the attempted killing of a member of Congress is National news , then Mark is probably right on with saying perhaps you have been an expat too long. I'd suggest your reread his last post -- perhaps you'll learn something of value today.
Mike
-
Its a national story. (Minor one though.) Where did I say otherwise. I said the speech misstepped in tone, delivery. The SPEECH was TOO national event-y. Also heres another one, it steps in its own doodoo of taking events from the media cycle rat fuck and letting that form the speech, the "presidential speech". (Since its a crazy guy, and we got a lot of the debate wrong about Sarah this and crosshairs that.) The event would have been smaller if the "political hate speech" issue hadn't flamed it. Its two conversations to have, finally, but a bit unconnected.
And the third. Which we had in this thread, bravo, but supposedly is dead on arrival debate in congress - gun control.
That should be the main topic.
It seems the killer didn't even SLIP through the cracks as his insanity was mentioned all over the community colleges official record of its relationship with him.
Geezum I'm about as far left as possible and I have one rhetorical empathy for a rather right perspective on rhetoric, and ya call me names. Which Obama just lectured you (according to the right's critic) not to do.
LOL
-
I subsequently watched my news rounds - Anderson Cooper, Maddow, Slate, etc. and many pundits on left and right analyzed his speech. Making similar observations.
Why dont you put me on ignore since i annoy you so much so personally that you feel compelled to lash out personally every so often - when I dunno, you could STICK TO THE SUBJECT. Oh and your cheap personal criticism is ignorant, by the way. Since I am American and vote in the US, pay taxes, and grew up there.
Ta ta dearie. One too many easy name calling substituting for intelligent debate. Ignored.
1) Subject was stuck to --- you opened the door - you expressed an opinion (which you are entitled to) and I expressed my opinion of your opinion (which I am entitled to)
2) Perhaps if President Obama was younger (oh, say late teens, early twenties) you would have had a better view of his speech
3) As far as news commentators opinions of his speech - and analysis of it - their opinion - which they have a right to - while I may not agree with their opinion, I have higher respect for their right to express it, as they don't consistently come across as pompous, arrogant, and judgmental (which I can cite post after post of yours, going back even to criticizing people's grammar, etc)
3) As far as ignoring you, not going to do that - because even though I don't agree with your statements and many times don't agree with your posts and feel that you come across the way I have already expressed (I realize that is my opinion) and there are also times when I do get items, facts, and opinions of value from you.
-
Obama's speech was probably written with past memorial services where Presidents have spoken in mind. Take the speech he gave on Wed night and give it in a church or outdoor setting where the mood would be more reverent and the perception of the speech would have been completely different. I started watching the service late and was taken aback by the applause and cheers, nothing like that of the Challenger, Oklahoma or WTC services. To me it seemed more a service of hope than memorial and I am sure the President adapted his delivery to what was best for that audience. And based on the sustained applause he received following his address I would say he was a huge success.
-
From my understanding - the President was even surprised and uncomfortable at times with the cheering and applause. However, it was reported that when people were waiting outside to get in there was not a "somber" mood, but more of an upbeat one and that when the doors were opened for the crowd to come in people applauded, etc.
Having watched the whole speech, I thought the President delivered an excellent speech -- I was surprised though at some of the applause at times and the shouts, etc. from the crowd. While I thought at times it was awkward, I also know that a lot of those in the audience were younger, college age students (as admission was first come, first serve - after dignataries, family members of those wounded, press, etc were admitted).
-
Geezum I'm about as far left as possible and I have one rhetorical empathy for a rather right perspective on rhetoric, and ya call me names. Which Obama just lectured you (according to the right's critic) not to do.
LOL
Far left? You're as bourgeois as they come. Your attempts to sound professorial clouded in a haze of bad grammar.
-
I thought the President did a great job with his speech.
He had 3 tasks.
1. Memorialize the victims.
2. Honor the heroes.
3. Address the heated rhetoric.
Check, check, and check.
Good job Mr. President. IMHO
RAB
-
Personally, I have not felt as proud to be an American, in a long time, as I was watching President Obama do, what a president is meant to do, during a national crisis. He gave a voice to 300 million Americans and offered a clarion call, asking all Americans to rethink how we conduct our national debates and reminding us all, that yes, we are better than the hate-filled speech that often passes for political debate. He spoke of victims and survivors in familiar tones, because they are familiar as part of our American family.
I believe President Obama was deliberate in his choice of both words and tone, because he was not there as only the president, but as a fellow American, giving a voice to the pain and fear that we all share. His role, dictated by his office, was to be the face and for a moment, the voice of America, with his only intent being to bring some clarity, sense and compassion to events that have shaken a nation.
I believe that only a cynic could have shared that national moment, and come away with any feelings that were not centered on compassion and understanding. For such people, all I can offer is a gentle reminder, that this event was national in scope and as such, deserved the undivided attention of a nation, if only for a few moments. A few moments, when our president appealed to all that is right with America and reminded us all, that there lies strength of character in all Americans, when we can stop our lives for just a moment, to reflect on those issues that should matter to us all.
-
Personally, I have not felt as proud to be an American, in a long time, as I was watching President Obama do, what a president is meant to do, during a national crisis. He gave a voice to 300 million Americans and offered a clarion call, asking all Americans to rethink how we conduct our national debates and reminding us all, that yes, we are better than the hate-filled speech that often passes for political debate. He spoke of victims and survivors in familiar tones, because they are familiar as part of our American family.
I believe President Obama was deliberate in his choice of both words and tone, because he was not there as only the president, but as a fellow American, giving a voice to the pain and fear that we all share. His role, dictated by his office, was to be the face and for a moment, the voice of America, with his only intent being to bring some clarity, sense and compassion to events that have shaken a nation.
I believe that only a cynic could have shared that national moment, and come away with any feelings that were not centered on compassion and understanding. For such people, all I can offer is a gentle reminder, that this event was national in scope and as such, deserved the undivided attention of a nation, if only for a few moments. A few moments, when our president appealed to all that is right with America and reminded us all, that there lies strength of character in all Americans, when we can stop our lives for just a moment, to reflect on those issues that should matter to us all.
Joe - once again - thank you for expressing so appropriately and accurately what I was trying to do earlier, but let my emotions get the best of me. As always, your post carried the message clear and bold.
-
Oh, and for some of the rest of you. Keep it on subject. Pot kettle????? Some of you hijacked this tread into pretty lame tangents - and hardly respectful - and I didn't call YOU names. At least my posts all through have been on topic.
Looking back, I am probably the main one that commented with "lame tangents".
And I have to disagree. I can't believe someone can watch a memorial service and put such focus on our President and his motives.
Where's the name calling? You have to remember Mecch, while it was televised, Obama's target audience was sitting in front of him. While I recognize the toll was no where near the proportion of 9/11, this tragedy has evoked some of the same emotions. It was an attack on our country's soul, nothing short of terrorism against Democracy. If we can rally behind Bush at ground zero with his lame battle cries.... we can definitely rally behind Mr. O in restoring our belief in democracy this nine year old put so much faith in.
Like I said, I disagree with your comments, which is the same smack I read in a Yahoo article 5 minutes before seeing your post. If that offends you, to bad.
-
You are one transparent, middlebrow flamer.
I subsequently watched my news rounds - Anderson Cooper, Maddow, Slate, etc. and many pundits on left and right analyzed his speech. Making similar observations.
Why dont you put me on ignore since i annoy you so much so personally that you feel compelled to lash out personally every so often - when I dunno, you could STICK TO THE SUBJECT. Oh and your cheap personal criticism is ignorant, by the way. Since I am American and vote in the US, pay taxes, and grew up there.
Ta ta dearie. One too many easy name calling substituting for intelligent debate. Ignored.
Speaking of pot/kettle... Meech, can you please explain to me, how your comment is nothing more than a veiled insult, disguised as a rebuttal to your supposed outrage? You cannot claim any superior position, when you reduce yourself to insulting others. It adds nothing to any discussion, however it is within your sphere of influence, so why would you debase yourself, by accusing others of doing just what you are doing?
-
This thread is disappointing. I too thought the speech was a little lackluster, but I know better than to argue with the rough tough crew of Aidsmeds. It just didn't feel very impassioned is all. Sure it was some great grandstanding, but there was a distinct lack of emoting. Granted, I had the television on and was reading a book at the time so I only caught bits and pieces as I anxiously awaited for Modern Family to come on.
The reason this got so much attention is because a Congresswoman was shot. I don't think this has happened in my lifetime or if it did I wasn't aware of it(or more likely can't currently remember). The tragedy is that 6 people died at the same time and it came to a political boil because of the downright hateful things the left and right have been saying to one another for a good long while.
Speaking of hateful comments you all are being downright hateful to one another. So Mecch didn't like the speech and spoke up about it. I'm sorry if he pissed in your cheerios but it looks like the reaction was 10 times worse than anything he said. It's threads like this one that need to be lit on fire and tossed out back because nothing productive comes out of it.
-
This thread is disappointing. I too thought the speech was a little lackluster, but I know better than to argue with the rough tough crew of Aidsmeds. It just didn't feel very impassioned is all. Sure it was some great grandstanding, but there was a distinct lack of emoting. Granted, I had the television on and was reading a book at the time so I only caught bits and pieces as I anxiously awaited for Modern Family to come on.
The reason this got so much attention is because a Congresswoman was shot. I don't think this has happened in my lifetime or if it did I wasn't aware of it(or more likely can't currently remember). The tragedy is that 6 people died at the same time and it came to a political boil because of the downright hateful things the left and right have been saying to one another for a good long while.
Speaking of hateful comments you all are being downright hateful to one another. So Mecch didn't like the speech and spoke up about it. I'm sorry if he pissed in your cheerios but it looks like the reaction was 10 times worse than anything he said. It's threads like this one that need to be lit on fire and tossed out back because nothing productive comes out of it.
Be honest, you think Obama should be running the fryer in your mom's burger joint don't ya?
-
Be honest, you think Obama should be running the fryer in your mom's burger joint don't ya?
Skeebo, that was clearly designed to start a slanging match. Consider yourself warned.
And with that, I'm locking this thread. It's going nowhere good fast. I've got better things to do with my Friday night than babysit.
Ann