Perhaps not. Both seemed disrespectful to me, that is the equivalence I see. We're all passionate & smart, and this is such a significant issue. The manner in which is as important as the facts, and it's hard to read "voice" in words on a screen. Nonetheless, I heard contempt in your statement. My apologies if that was not the case.Originally Posted by bae
I was just speaking on general frustration, not asserting that anyone was right/wrong or disrespectful or whatever. In my mind, though, telling someone to 'go play with their gun' (which is also one that i got), is just ad hominem straight up.
As opposed to a truly respectful: I disagree. Here is what I advocate and why." and if i -- say on FB again -- say but what about the 14th amendment, they talk about "yes, we need more help for people who are mentally ill." True, but not truly at issue in terms of gun control -- that's a whole other set of law (health care related stuff). So if we are talking about gun control and mental health screenings, we are talking 14th amendment stuff. God forbid someone ask a question about how to overcome those issues with what they're advocating without being told to "go play with your guns" or "sorry that you're such a right-wing nut job." Or, even better, "everyone should have to go through weekly checks in their homes to make sure their guns are safe -- one I heard today because 'we ticket for people who don't wear bicycle helmets on the road, afterall. Ok, not comparable law -- because you are freely out in freaking public AND you're only likely to hurt yourself if you happen to fall off your bike, and all of the sudden the 5th amendment for search without cause is somehow considered hunky-dory?
Ask that question, and you obviously don't care about little kids who live in homes with "live" weapons. Seeing as most of my high school friends (who are male) live in homes with both weapons and small children, I actually DO care and I also know that responsible parenting may or may not coincide with gun ownership, but I don't think illegal search and seizure (or 5th amendment due process concerns) should really go there.
Doesn't make me a bad person to be concerned about weekly police checks or asserting that it's possibly wrong-headed to use a vague term like "limiting access to 'mentally ill' people is a problem under the 14th amendment. it's too vague is part of the problem, and mental illness is too shifty to create a clear line. and how we get access to whehter or not a person is mentally ill? That's probably another 5th amendment issue.
Yes, bringing up these concerns is NOT about guns. It could be about access to raw milk for freak's sake (and it often is, btw, in the circles where I run). Guns are just the current "idea" at play. The 14th amendment had to do with a lot of different things, incluing access to educational resources, so. . . yeah.
Well said awakenedsoul. I have also felt a sense of ??? from people. I'm not exactly sure what it is. Part hopeless, part powerless, certainly disconnected, quite a bit of that self-pity, etc. Your choice of the word "heaviness" was, I thought, well done. In my very limited observations I don't see this as being confined to the younger set, although I agree it is more prevalent and manifests itself in different ways there than in people with a little more life experience. It's probably a miracle that anyone can stay grounded these days. The sensory overload from media of all kinds, a near constant stream of messages telling us how wonderful life could be if we just did this or bought that, the mind numbing array of violent images and portrayals of violent acts and on and on. We should probably be thankful that the Sandy Hooks only happen once in a great while rather than monthly, or weekly...or daily.
I could not wait to get out of the house and on my own when I was a teen. Don't get me wrong, my upbringing was pure Leave it to Beaver, I was just impatient. The country was in the middle of a deep recession at that time, but (thanks to the jack of all trades mentality farm kids get) I KNEW I would find a job, and did. I was hopeful and excited. I also had skills that most 18 year olds today don't. I could operate machinery, garden, raise animals, drive trucks, read/write/speak in complete sentences, weld, hunt, fish, cook, do laundry, fix almost anything with duct tape and baling wire (the rancher's tool kit), etc. Having those basic skills gives you an incredible sense of independence. I'm not convinced mastering Halo or being an i phone guru does the same thing.
You are right about a lack of that kind of hope these days. Maybe the answer has nothing to do with hardware at all. Maybe this is really a software problem. If so, that's too bad because I don't see even the slightest chance that western society is capable of dealing with that. That really would require a kinder, gentler approach. Can you imagine pounding your fist on the table and declaring 'we need to ban depression because it KILLS people'? No sense in saying 'you can have my Wellbutrin when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers'. No room for political grandstanding or chest pounding or much of anything beyond calm, rational, gentle understanding. Simply put, we suck at that.
"Back when I was a young boy all my aunts and uncles would poke me in the ribs at weddings saying your next! Your next! They stopped doing all that crap when I started doing it to them... at funerals!"
I have been thinking about this, and I don't think anyone could have stopped this crazy from doing what he did. Not his mother, who was heavily armed and trained in gun use apparently, or armed teachers (because of the above listed confusion/wild west scenario) People like this, unfortunately, will find a way. Yes, the semi-automatic guns made it possible for him to kill a large number in a relatively short time, but disturbed people will find a way.
What I think really needs to be addressed are the countless killings going on everyday, one on one. I believe first there needs to be standards across the board as far as buying, selling, and registration of guns. This is an area I think the federal government needs to be in charge, in that every state should have the same regulations as far as buying/selling/registration. Other laws, like hunting regulations, conceal carry, etc...could be state by state, as each state wishes. We cannot buy/sell a car without registering it, and need to renew that registration every year. And if you buy a car, you can trace that cars history back to it's 'birth' if you want/need. the same should be for guns. And it shouldn't matter if you buy from a dealer, or me to you, it should be registered each time. That way, if that gun is recovered at a crime scene, or found in the possession of a criminal, it can be traced back to the last person who legally owned it. If that person, (if not the criminal) can show it was stolen (police report) then they are not responsible. If however, they cannot account for the criminal having that gun, they should be held responsible, along with the criminal, for the crime. This protects the legitimate gun owner/collector if his gun is stolen in a robbery or whatever. This also would help to greatly stem the 'mules' who go to gun shows with their lily white records and purchase guns to resell to criminals. It would quickly become apparent if one persons guns repeatedly showed up at crime scenes.
Further, if anyone is in possession of a gun where the registration numbers have been rubbed off/altered, they should be charged, immediately. In this case, either you bought a gun with the numbers altered, or you altered them yourself. Either way you should be charged. This should be a crime in itself, and may already be, I don't know. Now, assuming all responsible gun owners want to stop senseless gun crime, these requirements seem quite reasonable. Not difficult or onerous. No ones rights being taken away, except the guy who wants to sell a gun under the table to less than desirable persons.
The registration process could be as straight forward, and simple, as car registration. It could even be held by the same office. And every responsible gun owner/collector would be glad to do it as it would be there largely to protect them. Someone is getting these guns somewhere. And no, these brain surgeon gang bangers aren't 'making' all their own guns, or having them imported, which could also be registered, by the way. They are getting them from friends who buy at gun shows in lax states, or steal them, or buy them from a friend who bought them from a friend, who bought them...etc..
I don't like guns, and I don't like how heavily armed America is. If you have a gun in the home, no matter how responsible you are, the likely hood of someone being shot, either accidentally, or in the heat of a moment, or suicide, is greatly increased. I believe the figures are 4 times more likely.
But, armed we are, and that's not going to change. So let's just put it back on the responsible gun owners. Let's just make them responsible for every gun out there. I would think every well trained, responsible gun owner out there would welcome the chance to prove it.
Well put, Peggy and Gregg.
Look around the world and learn. In the UK and Australia similar incidents resulted in guns being banned. For the life of me I can't understand why, in the US, carrying a gun is a right but Universal Healthcare is a privilege.
As long as damaged people have relatively easy access to weapons then can anyone honestly say other school shootings won't occur? Sooner rather than later.
Because the US was founded as a nation of sovereign individuals and the possession of firearms was central enough to the guarantee of sovereignty to be enshrined within our constitution. Whereas universal healthcare (available to all believe it or not) has been twisted to mean a collectivist entitlement, the antithesis of sovereignty.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
This may be important to you but I wonder if it's really that important to the grieving parents of dead children? The UK, and many other countries, has managed without a written constitution for a 1000 years.
That's correct, I believe (and please correct me if I'm wrong) the UK's version of a constitution has historically been a collection of governing documents, parliamentary conventions and royal perogatives, although recently based on parliamentary sovereignty. We chose individual over parliamentary and crafted a constitution limiting government's power (theoretically) rather than allowing it to be the source of all power.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
Why do you feel the need to direct this discussion? I don't see the word "moderator" under your name. This board traditionally needs less, not more, moderator intervention IMO although recent times are good.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote