This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Guns, Like Washing Machines, Don't Act - People Do
Via James E. Miller of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada,
Reprinted from the Middletown Press and Journal
In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, the usual cadre of politicians, pundits and commentators are hitting the airwaves and condemning believers of the “guns don’t kill” rationale. This exercise in demonization is being followed with pleas to strip Americans of their guns and place a ban on vaguely-defined “assault” weapons.
What’s been lacking in the flurry of proposals that inevitably followed a catastrophe like Sandy Hook has been a deeper look at the kind of environment impressionable minds are coming of age in. Far too often, politically-minded observers fall back on reactionary emotion for the solution to problems without actually engaging in critical thinking as to the root of what they are trying to solve.
As Southwestern University School of Law professor Butler Shaffer put it, we tend to focus too much “attention on the consequences of our behavior” instead of the “casual factors, as the thinking that produces dysfunctional results.”
We then end up looking to government to solve problems which it has a hand in creating. Many pro-gun control advocates are quick to mention that there is little gun violence in countries with “reasonable” gun laws in place. Yet as economist Thomas Sowell points out, countries with stricter gun control laws such as Mexico, Brazil and Russia all have higher murder rates than the U.S. When you compare Switzerland to Germany, where the former has higher rates of gun ownership than the latter, Switzerland has a lower murder rate.
The difficulty with using the empirical method to explain human phenomena is that it ignores the complexity of mankind. Data can be cherry-picked to prove any conclusion. Logic and reason are the best tools to make sense of a tragedy such as a school shooting. And the fact remains that government bans never prevent said goods from reaching the public. More often than not, good people abide by the prohibition while the more criminally inclined ignore the law.
The truth is we will never really know what compelled a young man to take the life of his mother, her coworkers and the children of Sandy Hook Elementary. There are discernable factors that may have played a significant role, however.
Our country’s empathetic response to the ongoing wars that result in the deaths of innocent women and children has certainly resulted in the dehumanizing of fatal violence. The press’s ignoring, and outright covering up, of the human victims (often called “collateral damage”) of the War on Terror has had an immeasurable impact on how today’s society views the loss of life.
When the Washington Post ran a photo of 2-year-old Ali Hussein being lifted from the rubble of his home in Baghdad after an American air strike in 2008, some wrote to the paper and complained that the picture would undermine the war effort. The fact that the child was stripped of a life that was fully ahead of him was lost on most Americans.
There also is the increased use of psychotropic pharmaceuticals that have been shown to induce suicidal and violent tendencies. These drugs were used by the shooter in Connecticut, the shooter in Aurora, Col., and one of the Columbine High School assailants.
The politically-connected pharmaceutical industry, in cahoots with the equally connected medical industry, cashes in by peddling these government-approved narcotics. While correlation doesn’t automatically mean causation, none of these points have been highlighted by a media establishment that would rather make quick judgments instead of taking the time to examine what has become the new “normal” American life.
Those who decry “the guns don’t kill people” line aren’t acknowledging reality. Guns are inanimate objects. They lack free will and consciousness. To say that a gun kills a person is to say that couches, shoes and washing machines can kill people.
In short, guns don’t act – people do. The same goes for television shows, movies and video games with violent content. They are objects that are valued by the minds of the public. Why so many in our society are drawn to violence is worth asking because the Sandy Hook shooting was but another extension of this fascination.
My father often shares with me an anecdote about a classmate who brought a rifle to his high school speech class to demonstrate how to properly clean a firearm. This was in the blue-collar city of Emmaus, and nobody felt unsafe in the presence of a student brandishing a functioning weapon. The question is; what has changed in the decades since the late 1960s? It certainly can’t be access to guns since they were just as widely available back then, if not more.
Eighteenth-century British statesman Edmund Burke once wrote that “the nature of man is intricate; the objects of society are of the greatest possible complexity” and that the simplicity often displayed in hasty political action is “grossly ignorant.” It’s disappointing, but not unexpected, to witness another intellectual mob calling for prohibition of the one tool that holds tyranny at bay.
Common sense says that disarming law-abiding citizens will make them more susceptible to harm. But in the aftermath of a tragedy such as Sandy Hook, rational thought is tossed aside in favor of short run solutions.
What must be considered is why some individuals are so drawn to violence, what effect has the increased prescription rate of antidepressants had, and why casualties in war have become so dehumanized. There is an uncomfortable but common denominator in all these factors.
I would hope anti-gun zealots notice it before they ramp up their War on Firearms.
»
- 21930 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
There are many hundreds of people in Europe and Canada who have been jailed for pure political speech.
Article 19 of the U.N. charter of human rights is a sad travesty.
The UN is a sad travesty in itself.
Guns are meant to wash clothes - just like washing machines.
Some people would have been better off if they'd been armed while washing. Notice how women are often targeted.
give him a sock
and then a necktie
My grandma was nearly gored by a bull whilst hanging out laundry. A train headed to the stockyard derailed, and the cattle got loose, next to her backyard. She hid behind a 55-gallon drum, the bull hit it, and launched her some feet. Black and blue.
Years later, she ran her hand through her wringer washing machine. I was there and heard her scream.
The lady didn't like laundry day.
So your grandma was Wile E. Coyote? Thanksgiving dinners must have been a hoot.
She had Acme everything.
Washing machines are meant to kill people - just like guns.
So nearly 1500 black children are killed every year by handguns.
Now a few dozen white children are killed over the past TEN YEARS by a semi-automatic rifles.
What should we regulate?
the issuance of money.
I have been proposing for some time that we institute gun-control for US blacks. They commit some 79% of violent crime and 90% of all gun crime. Most blacks killed are killed by blacks so we can use the safety and protection argument.
After it is implemented, we will see how it goes for 3-years. If blacks kill less often, say a 50% drop, then we can roll it out to the rest of the public.
Give the gun-people their test case.
No I know it won't happen or work, but it sure would be fun watching the gun-control people and niggers go at it. That is a reality-show that I would watch.
well, it's not a black or white thing.
It's a poor thing that drives people into crime.
And the way the economy is... whites will enter the charts in bigger numbers.
Everybody's entire life.
That's what it's coming to.
"guns don’t act – people do"
That ain't the point. I'd love to have a crack at firing RPG's at targets instead of what is legally allowed. Sounds like a hell of a lot of fun. Should those be as available as handguns?
The way I read it, "arms" would be anything issued to a light infantryman. M16/M4, grenades, light anti-armor weapons.
Funny thing, you CAN buy a tank, an artillery piece or a jet fighter if you have the $$.
Right you are. Under our constitution the only thing that the government can prohibit private persons from owning are crew served weapons.
That is weapons that a person cannot "bear" alone.
But it says "keep and bear", authorizing both keeping and bearing of arms. Thus, in theory, arms you can keep but not bear would also be authorized. The only way the constitution can be read to allow prohibiting my owning a nuclear weapon is if nuclear weapons are, somehow, not the "arms" referred to. If that is so, we must admit that the Second Amendment does not extend to everything that can conceivably understood as "arms". Then, we must draw a line, which means we must decide where to draw it.
I'm done with factual arguments when it comes to gun control. With that in mind; allow me to retort: Everybody comparing owning a semi-automatic rifle with owning a nuclear weapon is a stupid motherfucker who doesn't have two fucking brain cells to rub together. Those two things are so fucking far apart that it's not even funny. Nothing in common whatsoever. So just shut the fuck up with that shit you fucking stupid idiot moron inbred puke-eating cum guzzling shitbag!!!!
Do you have a suitable private location for using your toy? If so, what's the problem?
Guns don't kill people ..... Actually it's the bullets
or the bayonets.
Pistol-whipping kills robbery victimPosted: Feb 09, 2012 5:42 PM CST Updated: Feb 09, 2012 5:44 PM CST
MEMPHIS, TN -
(WMC-TV) – Memphis police are searching for the gunmen who pistol whipped a man that ended up dying from his injury.
http://www.wmctv.com/story/16902745/pistol-whipping-kills-robbery-victim
Damn, Crock, you're on a roll!
It's simply a matter of realizing that there's no such thing as never or always and a little help from the Google.
You're doing pretty good yourself. Sudsy, indeed!
Oh and Nukes and Grenades don't kill people either. Why shouldn't everyone have their own personal nuclear arsenal?
That would create a level playing field, a notion which is despised by corporate Amerika and their fed and state goobermint bitch-thugs.
That's the most idiotic strawman argument possible.
The first thing that occurs to one who takes your question seriously is cost. Do you think folks can afford to purchase and store nuclear weapons? The next thing that comes to mind is personal preference. Do you believe that everybody wants to own nuclear weapons?
My problem with this is simple math.
A lot of people use guns to kill themselves. I personally support their right to do this.
However, if these same people decide to use a nuclear weapon to kill themselves, then I start getting all pissy.
ROFLMAO
Surely the problem could not have anything to do with this pathetic hollowed-out excuse for culture or Society or """educational system""" or family values which we have. Surely. S-u-r-e-l-y. Once again the cargo-cult natives are restless.
The cargo-cult religion thats instilled into every American child's brain serves the purpose of the masters to keep up the perpetual status race and indebt the slaves into there willing servitude. That's the way it wsa planned a hundred years ago.
The government is ad hoc but seldom does it miss it mark. The PTB will think up something new when this scheme has run its course.
This is a well-reasoned piece and has many valid points. This is the nuanced point of view that should be pushed by gun advocates, not the views of loons like Alex Jones who actually damage the pro-gun movement more than they help it.
But in all seriousness, we are talking about a possible ban on weapons of war (AR-15s and all variants). Weapons of this type are far to easy to get in America today (I live in Virginia - gun shows are flat out ridiculous), and I honestly believe that needs to change.
As long as the dinner was good....................
When the Bill of Rights was drafted, just what kinds of guns do you think most gun-owning Americans owned?
.
.
.
The very same ones they picked up and took to war.
They had the most deadly handheld firearms then in existence at arm's reach for the majority of their lives.
Check your premises.
Whose military uses the ar-15 in combat?
I Don't, and I am a survivor of a gun crime. I was robbed and shot in both legs with an SKS. Serious arterial damage.
Show me one place in America today where drugs are not available. If you outlaw guns - criminals will sell them and criminals will own them.
When it comes to your life you may only get one chance. Live every day like its your last and never subcontract your security and your family's to the government.
Buy a quality weapon and learn how to use it.
I live in Virginia - gun shows are flat out ridiculous), and I honestly believe that needs to change.
You should move from VA to MD and Baltimore. Baltimore has very strict gun laws and you will feel much safer.
The sickening hillarity is that VA was the site of some of the biggest mass murders done in the name of northern economic aggression against the southern states that was bankrolled by the same evil european bankers. Hundreds of thousands were murdered by the state and politicians to make european bankers wealthier and allow their surrogate sto invade the south after the "war."
Do tell....what exactly do you find 'ridiculous' about VA gun shows?
The article notes that a broad spectrum of the political landscape is calling for greater gun control.
That's prima facia evidence of the phony left/right, republican/democrat paradigm.
The elite want it. It's being pushed.
Politicians of every creed, color and sexual proclivity are in favor of disarming you.
You don't care if you kill a classroom of children if you are on any of the mind control drugs. I have dealt with a lot of kids on these drugs, my wife worked in special ed for at risk students until a kid went of his meds, when he was shifted to a different foster home, and tried to kill her.
You lose all sense of self and all sense of actual conciousness on these drugs. I took Prozac for a year for anxiety. I weaned myself off of it because I didn't feel anything anymore. Prozac is practically a sugar pil compared to the newer drugs.
They are giving kids anti-psychotics for ADD, it is insane. Most of these kids don't even suffer from anything, they are just restless because they have no outlet to release energy. Any real psychologist would tell you giving a normal kid mind altering drugs can cause the disorder the drugs are meant to correct.
Then you have the problem of missing even one dose of the drug. Even missing one dose can send a kid into a total meltdown. The drugs rewrite the brain, and the child becomes more addicted to the chemical than a crack addict. Ever witness a drug addict crash?
We may not know the motive behind the shooting but we can definitely know the cause, drugs. Big Pharma is at fault and should be tried and convicted of murder.
I would imagine the kid may have been taken off the drugs and believed he could get more at the school in the counselors office. Taking guns to a school and kiling people wouldn't have even registered. Killing 8 year old kids may have been the way his whacked out mind thought he could get more pills. Kill the kids on the pills to take their pills.
You can't think sane when trying to understand the insane.
That is right. It is people who buy guns who kill people. So, the logical conclusion is that people without guns and bullets would not kill people, at least not so many. So, what would be the use of an assault gun if not to kill people? Certainly not to defend from an ants invasion. Why would people buy guns if they have no intention of ever killing anyone? If anyone really thinks that lose ragtag of semi-organized citizens with guns can fend off a modern-day invasion, that only happens in (american) movies: have you watched Red Dawn lately?
Truth to be told, any culture has fixations that look absurd to outsiders, and americans just happen to have this fixation with guns. Quite frankly, everyone should be entitled to have their credos even more so if they think they are defending their freedom. However, many are so busy defending their freedom with guns that they are not realizing (because of lack of education) how they are getting screwed by the special groups who play obscure financial games. bToo bad that there is no amendment in the US constitution that defends people's right to have a real education, which is a pretty powerful weapon to defend freedom.
Just one thing. Let's not pretend that we are horrified when little children get shot for no reason, and let's just consider that as part of the acceptable collateral damage. Because it is only a matter of time until such things happen again.
I have purchased many firearms with no intention of using them to kill anyone. Many people simply enjoy target shooting. Adam Lanza never purchased a firearm. The guns he used to kill were stolen becuase they were not stored properly by an irresponsible gun owner.
Actually, that owner had jumped through all of the hoops in one of the most restrictive states in the US. Background checks, waiting period, registration, and a gun safe. Just goes to show that a person determined to commit mayhem is virtually impossible to stop, even with a thorough trampling of civil liberties.
There is no credible evidence that Adam Lanza killed anyone. The evidence suggests that he was a patsy and the killings were politically motivated, i.e. intended to cause the confiscation of firearms to make the country safer for bankers and their ilk.
+1 for the most sensible, rational post yet.
The mother's carelessness was the crime's initiator.
"If anyone really thinks that lose ragtag of semi-organized citizens with guns can fend off a modern-day invasion, that only happens in (american) movies"
And in Afghanistan, twice, by the two most powerful militaries the world has ever seen.
In Afghanistan they also had RPGs and other sophisticated weapons supplied by the most powerful militaries the world have ever seen (covertly). Do you really think they went against tanks with guns and pistols?
The IRA fought Great Britain to a standstill, too. At the end of the day, wars are still won or lost by men with rifles.
The IRA had primarily bombs, kidnappings, and other means.
In Northern Ireland, a conflict based on violence came to a standstill.
In India however, a war was won without firing a single shot.
You don't think Americans will resort to fighting dirty to retain what's left of their freedom?
India. A shithole.
Why else would every marine be first and foremost a basic rifleman?
I think that when guerillas raid armories in order to secure RPGs they use rifles and pistols.
Umm, I can't post the links cause the feds will be knocking at my door, but an RPG is a VERY simply device, and with some basic searches you can find the plans to make all three parts on the internet.
I bought my gun with the intention of killing people for protection if necessary. If an intruder breaks into my home, I will kill them to protect my wife and son.
I did not buy the gun to run wild through the street shooting people.
I know that if it comes down to it, I wil not be protected from harm without the weapon. The government and the police do not have the ability to protect my family, they can only react to the tragedy.
ADR.. You are a realist. Those who aren't, are in for a rude awakening.
Gunfire always wakes me up when it's close to the house.
You really need to move.
"I bought my gun with the intention of killing people for protection if necessary. If an intruder breaks into my home, I will kill them to protect my wife and son.
I did not buy the gun to run wild through the street shooting people.
I know that if it comes down to it, I wil not be protected from harm without the weapon. The government and the police do not have the ability to protect my family, they can only react to the tragedy."
That right there is the definition of a shitty unsafe country.
In most Western countries (where guns are allowed at home, but under prior background checks + safety training), the laws are aligned with most people's instincts: To use deadly force (shoot to kill) only to protect oneself and family from imminent and present mortal danger. Othwerwise a "shoot to wound/incapacitate" is allowed.
In the US however, thanks to the 'supreme' wisdom of our Supreme Court, this won't do. If you "shoot to wound/incapaciate", you open yourself to possible criminal and certainly civil litigation. If you "shoot to kill" -- even though the Robber/Intruder does not pose a 'mortal' threat, well, that is "ok"... Kill him anyway. Shoot first, ask questions alter.
I have no qualms about the use of deadly force for purely defensive purposes (under imminent mortla danger), but my "Logic-chip 2525", common sense and basic human decency all tell me that the Supreme Court ruling is once again FUBAR. And is -- in effect, even if not in intent(?) -- inducing people to kill intruders that usually need not be killed.
At my recent gun safety class, our instructor (decorated ex-military) gave us some examples of simple "domestic/family SNAFUs" that this mentality led to death of a family member. E.g. Hubby goes to check on a "noise in house", returns to bedroom and jokingly says "Boo!" from behind bedroom door, only to be shot by wife. Dumb law + dumb man + dumb woman = Dead man + woman richer with life/wife insurance.
"First thing we do, is we hang all the lawyers". -Napoleon
"we can definitely know the cause, drugs"
That's right. Thousand of people die in Mexico and the US because of drug wars.
Where did these stats came from? Perhaps the wrong drugs were used. In the 60s', most young people were on drugs and yet they did not decimate their population by shooting each other (liver cancer took care of that).
We're talking about prescription drugs given to children as well as adults which explicitly cite suicidal and homicidal tendencies among their side effects.
Really well said.
DrDre
Here'a stat for you, more people are murdered every year WITH HAMMERS, than guns.
The problem isn't guns, it's defective people. Unfortunately, this ignorant, stupid, greedy, narcissistic, soul-crushing culture has a lot of defective people at this point in time. Can we somehow ban them?
So, how many people can a guy with a good, sharp samurai sword take out in a shopping mall before the cops decide to show up? How about a determined dude with a hunting bow or a good knife? These defective idiots will still find some way to be assholes.
I'd say I could take out at least 100 people in a shopping mall with a good quality kitchen knife, maybe more.
An aluminum baseball bat could crush the skulls of quite a few as well.
Blocking the door and breaking open a whole bunch of household cleaners in a Walmart could kill a few dozen.
You could take a F-150 for a test drive and drive through a crowd.
Pretty easy to rig a high school bleacher to collapse at a Friday Football game.
The point. You don't need a gun if you want to kill a lot of people. If you are a psychopath, you'll find a way.
Doctors' kitchen knives ban call
A&E doctors are calling for a ban on long pointed kitchen knives to reduce deaths from stabbing.
A team from West Middlesex University Hospital said violent crime is on the increase - and kitchen knives are used in as many as half of all stabbings.
They argued many assaults are committed impulsively, prompted by alcohol and drugs, and a kitchen knife often makes an all too available weapon.
The research is published in the British Medical Journal.
The researchers said there was no reason for long pointed knives to be publicly available at all.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm
Fillet knives are just a lot easier to get through the rib cage than a big fat chef's knife.
"You broke my heart, now I'm breaking yours, Mister."
But if they take my filleter away, I'll have to make do with broad slashes at the throat with the chef's knife.
A girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do. But don't take my fillet knife, I've got salmon to prep.
Sorry, I take back the you need to move comment; I love salmon too right out of the water...
Well, I guess the residents of West Middlesex won't be able to have their pudding, because they won't be able to cut their meat to eat it.
"How can yer have any pudding if yer don't eat yer meat?!"~Pink Floyd, The Wall
I like the idea of taking the F150 for a spin. Maybe we could write a script and make a movie. :)
"I'd say I could take out at least 100 people in a shopping mall with a good quality kitchen knife, maybe more.
An aluminum baseball bat could crush the skulls of quite a few as well.
Blocking the door and breaking open a whole bunch of household cleaners in a Walmart could kill a few dozen."
You're an idiot. People will scatter and you'll be shot by security guards. Moron.
If you admit that a gun in the hands of responsible adult can save lives then you must want to ban guns so that more innocent people die, right?
That's right ban guns and learn some real self defence like jujitsu or some shit. I'd like to see your ass get tasered for being a dumbshit.
Agenda 21, my friends. Never let a good crisis go to waste, and another giant leap on the road to serfdom.
The day the government passes laws to take our guns away is the day the revolution will start all over again.
Plus, cars and stairs kill more people than guns, so while we're at it, let's outlaw those as well. Oh, and I heard some lady slipped on a piece of soap and broke her neck, so add soap to the list. And,...
Politicians kill more people than all the guns ever made. Almost all the people killed by guns were killed by guns controlled by politicians. Hitler disarmed the German people, then he killed them, and everyone else. Hilary thinks its a good idea; are we clear?
More people died at the hands of their own "legitimate" governments during the 20th century than in all of the wars of history combined.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/infringement
End of story. You want to infringe on my rights? Pass an amendment that gives the government the permission to legislate in this area.
If not, fuck off.
pods
The crooked politicians are afraid for their lives. That's all that means.
Not even close to being nearly afraid enough yet, IMHO.
As long as voters keep rehiring these fecal feeders, they enable the evil that befalls us.
Fire your congressman and state legislators. Make them get REAL jobs for the first time.
Subtitled: Alex Jones damage control
Good one!
I was going to say: " Alex Jones couldn't have said it better."
;-)
Gibson: "I really think you're making a big mistake going on [the Alex Jones Show] and associating yourself with those views and making all these people that listen to Alex Jones believe that you agree with them."
Ron Paul:"...I think you make a giant mistake to try to accuse me that I'm defending everything Alex Jones says. I think that's very unfair...Just like Alex Jones will do; he'll try to put words in my mouth. You try to put words in my mouth too, just like Alex Jones does."
This is not a rhetorical issue. It will be a fight. The Second Amendment is not like some vague law and both sdes know it. I doubt there are a dozen people who are interested in the subject who will be swayed by the idea of whether guns or people killl people. Folks have made up their minds...long ago.
From here on out it will be those who believe thay can limit firearms without destroying the country versus those who know that this is it. The last chance to self defense of the citizenry.
I see a bloody future full of lone wolf 'terrorists' who do not trust others due to the federal government's ability to spy on all conversation and exchanges of information. This will come at a time when people feel the need to be armed more than ever in our history. It will also come when the currency is in doubt. I see a quasi civil war leading to the loss of faith in the country by the rest of the world. It could itself cause the fall of the dollar.
I do not like what I see. Friends reassure me that 'they' failed to get anything more than the first 'assault rifle 'bill through Congress and they could not keep it. This is of little comfort. The very act of trying to pass a law that over rules an Amendment at a time like this is extremely dangerous. Blood runs high and gun owners have reached their limit. They will see those trying to ram these laws through as traitors and because we are in such a precarious economic position with such high unemployment there will be those with only minimal self control and far more time on their hands than in previous years. These people could decide to go rogue. It is a dangerous mix. Those pushing anti-freedom, anti-gun laws may find their arrogance has caused them to mis-judge the national mood. Even if no law is passed it will be a very effort. If I were so inclined I'd say a prayer for the country.
If a gun ban is passed, the best case scenario is widespread disobedience to federal law not seen since Prohibition. Again, that is the best case scenario. The traitors play a dangerous game.
If a gun ban is passed, it will be very difficult to find and purchase ammunition.
The problem isn't guns or defective minds: both coexist peacefully on most days. The problem is the inability for people to grasp that in the course of one's life good people will intersect with bad, or good things will be used for bad purposes. We have space and time and things moving throughout it: shit is going to happen.
How to maximize your washing machine experience : Cut a slit in your old tennis balls .... just big enough to insert one of your old golf balls .... add about 5 to 10 of these "aggitation enhancers" to the wash load ! Say good bye to crotch cheese .... caused by unclean under wear ! Monedas 1929 Comedy Jihad We Bring Good Things To Life World Tour
I wonder what happened here? My phone has been ringing tonight but I am not answering. I am an executive officer of one of the two districts mentioned in the article and a voting delegate. This looks interesting but I have recused myself from the STATISTS since about the middle of May. Maybe I will call that gal back who personally phoned me earlier and ask her if she reads ZH or LRC? That is a fair question to ask as I could be a "surpise factor" if I decide to show up.
I always end up in the middle of shit like this somehow my friends. This is going to require some due diligence on my part. I happen to be a pursuasive public speaker if I need to be. I write what I know from experience and she called me first anyway.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2013/01/morrow_gottwalt.shtml
the 2nd amendment is not up for debate. defense of one's life and liberty is a natural borne right, not instilled w/i you by a parchment of paper or cotton or hemp or animal skin, but by the fact that you are human. if one is unable to realize that, then that is a flaw w/i one's own perception. like the 1st amendment, you can choose to exercise your right or not, that is all.
only one question needs to be asked: when they come to confiscate the guns, do they take them at gunpoint?...
that's what i thought.
The articles today saying binge drinking kills 23k woman and girls a year.... yet, firearms kill 11k/year - many of those suicides sadly enough.
When everyone is in straight-jackets, guess we'll be safe then?
Absolute proof Sandy Hook was a staged false-flag:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khQJ9i8mqoE
"I just want you to know that we are working on it," Brady recalled the president telling them. "We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar."
Barry Soetoro
Regulate psychotropic drugs more seriously than say, alcohol, and then I'm open to discussing gun control.
there's no need to negotiate your gun rights away.
On a related note, in case anyone here may be interested and hasn't heard yet, John Noveske passed away this past Friday in a car accident. He was the owner/founder of Noveske Rifleworks in Grants Pass, OR...which makes some of the best AR-15s available...and more importantly, supposedly he was a pretty good guy.
He was just 36 years old (same as me...which is a bit of a wake up call...).
I find it incredibly ironic that he was killed in an automobile accident...as no one is trying to ban automobiles...and yet they kill 90 people in the U.S. every day...
Back to the horse and buggy, baby. :)
PS Provided that the horses wear the diapers. :)
Nope, that's out too...
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2011/12/amish_accident_seymour...
Driving-while-Amish has proved, once again, a hazardous activity in Missouri.
A 19-year-old Amish kid died on Friday after his horse-and-buggy was rear-ended by an SUV north of Seymour a few days earlier.
http://www.kentuckynewera.com/web/news/article_90b805ce-a9cf-11e0-8468-0...
An Illinois man is being held at the Christian County Jail after a tractor-trailer he was driving hit a horse-drawn buggy, killing a young Amish girl and injuring three members of her family Friday night on Fort Campbell Boulevard, police said
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/breaking/5-hurt-in-amish-buggy...
Five members of an Amish family were injured in Clarion, and the horse drawing their buggy was killed by a suspected drunken driver last night, state police said.
Having lots of military grade assault rifles and hand guns floating around the general populace is really working out swell. Someone put on the national anthem.
Let me see 33,000 deaths by automobile vs 11,000 deaths by gun most of them suicide or criminal on criminal. Which one is the most dangerous ? Do yourself a favor and read the federalist papers... educate yourself.
Please do not fall prey to this banker sponsored anti-gun narrative. I will write something later on if need be.
There is no Constitutional right for car ownership. Ban cars - if it saves just one life.
324 by rifles of any type. In a country of 310 million, you have better odds of winning the lottery.
Hah! I'm sure it will be so much "sweller" when everyone turns them in!!! More like... it will be open season for the banksters and their lackeys to loot what's left of America.
An insincere, low probability for success gun grab is a distraction for ?
Excellent question, I have been casting around the net myself looking for that answer. All I can think of is foreign war and an oil crisis.. This gun control exercise is low probability and too much of a brute force effort for barry, he is smarter than this. But sometimes a cigar is a cigar, well ready for any eventuality. As crockett A says above leverage the first until you absolutely positively must leverage others.
Economic collapse.
Folks, time to step back and look at the forest...
If select politicians were truly concerned about unnecessary deaths in the US, they would do this:
1. Do a Pareto of the causes of deaths
2. Address the 3-5 biggest contributors
3. Work your way down.
4. If you wanted to address any (politically expedient) cause way down on the Pareto, you do another Pareto on the key drivers. E.g., Gun safety skills, access by minors, the mentally deficient, mentally ill/impaired. Gun clubs can quickly ID and filter the 1-2% of 'ticking time-bombs'. Healthy psyches have a natural radar for the unhealthy/dangerous psyches. No Gov bureaucracy needed.
Unfortunately these things cannot ID political sociopaths, who go on to kills hundreds of thousand or millions.
If you were truly sincere about mitigating the real causes. Otherwise, let's not get bamboozled by Pretext with Reason.
We need more engineers in Congress than damn lawyers. More crtical thinkers than sheep.
They weren't his mother's coworkers.
Bingo! Why does this lie continue to propagate? Nearly everyone, including the posters here, assume that Adam Lanza did the killings with his mother's guns. There have been no published ballistics tests to show this. There has not been an impartial investigation into the killings. It looks like there won't be one either.
Adam Lanza had no motive for this crime. He also did not have means, i.e. the killings were obviously done be a very well trained person or persons with all their abilities intact, (i.e. not in a drug induced stupor). There has been no evidence that Lanza had the necessary training to quickly shoot the victims multiple times in the head.
I suggest the reason is because TPTB are the real ones behind the killings. The killings were done to accomplish a political agenda, not unlike the Port Arthur massacre (the investigation results of which are still a state secret).
If a washing machine gets into the hands of the wrong person, the worst that can happen is the person ruins their clothers. If a gun gets in to the hands of the wrong person the lives of 20 5-year olds are lost forever.
And if a computer and a keyboard gets into the wrong hands, it can make those with intelligence, principles, a knowledge of individual liberty, and a proper historical perspective on gun ownership want to pick up those guns and use them against the mindless sheep who knowingly or unknowingly perpetuate the half-truths, lies and statist propaganda of their political and intellectual captors.
If a printing press gets into the hands of the wrong person, the life savings of 300,000,000 are lost forever.
How do you stop crazy people from getting guns? Crazy people in China only have access to knives. So same crazy but less deaths.
China is an awesome example! They are much more civilized than we are, unless you include little things like the "great leap forward" that was responsible for tens of millions of deaths (http://www.scottmanning.com/content/visualizing-the-great-leap-forward/) in a four year period. Sure, that was all the way back in the late 50's and early 60's. Who can even remember that far back? Plus, they're all better now, and they promise not to do it again! On a non-sarcastic note, the above example clearly illustrates why the 2nd amendment is there.
And the US of A is so much more civilised with kids getting shot and what not.
Let's have more assault weapons that crazy people can use to kill innocent kids and women. Then our men can shoot the crazy guy and be a hero. Yay the American hero.
Talking to yourself privately is one thing but a person who carries on a conversation with themselves in a public venue is likely of his nut a bit.
No. Thinking that more guns leads to less gun violence and less gun deaths is crazy. You are the real gun crazy.
And they have that great political system in which you can exercise your right to stand in front of a rolling tank if you want to be heard by the powers that be. What's not to like?
While crazy people shoot defenceless innocent kids in the US.
Yeah, because they were only crazy because they had a gun, right?
Please move to China. Maybe their government will pay you more as a troll than our hijacked government does!
Please go to Syria where you can learn to use an AR properly. Hopefully they shoot your ass.
The Al Qaeda forces which the Saudis and US are supporting in Syria have selective fire weapons, not semi-auto ar-15s. But thanks for playing!
Big fuckin difference. AR-15s are pissy assault weapons by military standards but are nonetheless assault weapons. Go to Syria if you want to prove your manhood.
Ah, but according to you, we should ban those knives because crazy people are killing other people with them. Less lives taken at a time doesn't mean the knife is less dangerous than the gun, you fuckwit. It's the hands in which the weapon is held that make the gun and the knife dangerous, not the gun or knife itself. I held a butcher knife in my hand last night to carve a pot roast. I didn't run around the town stabbing people through the gut with it. I held a gun in my hand last week to shoot target at my club. I didn't run around an elementary school killing kids with it.
Don't be a moron. When was the last time a crazy used a knife to gut 36 kids? Stick to your pot roasts.
Sorry, it was only 28 kids. I guess that's better in your eyes, eh?
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/04/28/china.knife.attack/index.htm...
"At least 28 children were injured when a man with a knife attacked a kindergarten in east China on Thursday morning, state media said."
A crazy Chinaman killed eight school kids with a knife but you think that's OK. How do you live with yourself?
The same way you live with 25 dead 5 year olds killed with guns. Moron.
I'm sick of living in the twilight zone. Did any of you see the interviews with these alleged parents of the murdered children? Something ain't right about them. Watch them on Youtube. I'm talking about the interviews with Diane Sawyer, Anderson Cooper. They look fake as shit.
Get use to it. Ten plus years after 9/11 there are still dozens of unanswered questions. The facts of the tragedy take a backseat to the truthiness of the political agenda.
Gun crazies are fake as shit. You probably think dead kids are fake too.
Miseans have a blind spot. But wait just one more sentence before you hit the down arrow. All creeds and/or perspectives and/ or economic systems have them.
The blind spot of note here is the American failure to come to grips with its cultural reliance on lethal firearms as a matter of right. I've said before that insistence on the primacy of t2nd Amendment rights diminishes other rights, like, for instance the rights to life and liberty, speech and freedom from searches and surveillance.
The obvious outcome of living in a land where "have gun will travel" is sacrosanct is a land of fear. When you can not only openly carry a loaded fire arm, and stand your ground, you are a menace, a ticking time bomb and a threat. And, that is how everyone must view you.
You are, therefore, a member of an uncivil society and a hostile landscape. You must be watched at all times. Others must be careful what they say, how they walk around you. No one must ever rub you you the wrong way because if they do, you have the capacity to shoot and kill them and ask or answer questions later in a context where your victim can say nothing at all.
Guns are not a guarantor of any meaningful rights. They are a scurge, an outrage and a terrible affliction upon US society. They do not protect. They kill and they injure grievously.
Misesns, please in this one instance reconsider your usual self assurance that everything you say about anything is truer and more perceptive than what anyone else has to say.
Thank you.
If I'm so blind why can I read the following while you can't?
Pearl High School shooting
The incident began on the morning of October 1, 1997 when Luke Woodham fatally stabbed and bludgeoned his mother, Mary Woodham, as she prepared for a morning jog. At his trial, Woodham claimed that he could not remember killing his mother.
Woodham drove his mother's car to Pearl High School. Wearing an orange jumpsuit and a trenchcoat,[1] he made no attempt to hide his rifle. When he entered the school, he fatally shot Lydia Kaye Dew and Christina Menefee, his former girlfriend. Pearl High School assistant band director, Jeff Cannon, was standing five feet away from Dew when she was fatally shot. Woodham went on to wound seven others before leaving, intending to drive off campus and conduct another shooting at the nearby Pearl Junior High School. However, assistant principal Joel Myrick had retrieved a .45 pistol from the glove compartment of his truck and subdued Woodham inside his mother's car. Then Myrick demanded "Why did you shoot my kids?" to which Woodham replied, "Life has wronged me, sir."[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Woodham
Parker Middle School dance shooting
The Parker Middle School dance shooting was an incident that occurred on April 24, 1998 at a restaurant in Edinboro, Pennsylvania, United States. 14-year-old Andrew Jerome Wurst fatally shot 48-year-old John Gillette, and wounded another teacher and two students[1] at Nick's Place (a nearby restaurant) during an 8th grade graduation dance.[2]
The shooting ended when the owner of Nick's Place, James Strand, intervened and confronted Wurst with his shotgun, ordering him to drop his weapon and later holding him at bay for eleven minutes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Middle_School_dance_shooting
The post quoted below takes exception to my claim of societal and of ideological blindness to the perils and the uncivility of a gunslinger culture where "have gun will travel" is a virtue and not an indicator of barbarism.
The fascinating thing about the below quoted post is its utter failure to grasp, register or even marginally comprehend that recounting incidents where children can freely and easily walk into schools and shoot and kill people with lethal firearms is an absolute indictment of the society.
I am questioned as to whether or not I can read the following.
That's rich.
"...
If I'm so blind why can I read the following while you can't?
Pearl High School shooting
The incident began on the morning of October 1, 1997 when Luke Woodham fatally stabbed and bludgeoned his mother, Mary Woodham, as she prepared for a morning jog. At his trial, Woodham claimed that he could not remember killing his mother.
Woodham drove his mother's car to Pearl High School. Wearing an orange jumpsuit and a trenchcoat,[1] he made no attempt to hide his rifle. When he entered the school, he fatally shot Lydia Kaye Dew and Christina Menefee, his former girlfriend. Pearl High School assistant band director, Jeff Cannon, was standing five feet away from Dew when she was fatally shot. Woodham went on to wound seven others before leaving, intending to drive off campus and conduct another shooting at the nearby Pearl Junior High School. However, assistant principal Joel Myrick had retrieved a .45 pistol from the glove compartment of his truck and subdued Woodham inside his mother's car. Then Myrick demanded "Why did you shoot my kids?" to which Woodham replied, "Life has wronged me, sir."[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Woodham
Parker Middle School dance shooting
The Parker Middle School dance shooting was an incident that occurred on April 24, 1998 at a restaurant in Edinboro, Pennsylvania, United States. 14-year-old Andrew Jerome Wurst fatally shot 48-year-old John Gillette, and wounded another teacher and two students[1] at Nick's Place (a nearby restaurant) during an 8th grade graduation dance.[2]
The shooting ended when the owner of Nick's Place, James Strand, intervened and confronted Wurst with his shotgun, ordering him to drop his weapon and later holding him at bay for eleven minutes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Middle_School_dance_shooting"
:-/
So society is to be indicted but individual responsible citizens who populate that society must be barred form protecting themselves with a firearm which is the only proven method of stopping a school shooting as shown in the evidence presented. I suppose that the death toll in Pearl and Edinboro was not high enough in your opinion and that's why you object to firearms in the hands of responsible adults.
And you are completely full of shit and a retard of the first order.
Having lived in both gun-controlled cities and freely gun-carrying hinterlands, I can tell you unequivocally that I routinely, nay, always felt far safer in the latter than in the former --- as the crime statistics of the respective areas bore out.
Once again, the gun-grabbers can only speak from hysteria, fear and insecurity. There is simply no logic, none whatsoever, on your side --- nor historical fact, nor any element of pro-liberty principles. You merely wish to disarm everyone to bring them down to your own level of moral, intellectual and physical impotence.
So having a gun makes you a real man? That'd be right.
Not being scared of an inanimate object makes him a man.
How much is Feinstein's mafia paying you!?
Tuco
No more than NOT having a gun makes you a real man.
Actually, it's the Y chromosome and roughly eighteen years of living that makes one a man. But observation and reasonable analysis were never your long suit.
Only in your narrow minded universe does eighteen years make a boy a man. Just like shooting a gun gives you a dick.
1. If you choose to take the life of someone, without a clear & present mortal danger, you are murderer and are called that.
2. If you take lots of lives of your own volition, you are called a 'psychopath'. If you do it on the volition of very, very powerful people, you are called a War Hero.
3. If you kill thousands or millions, and have others do the killing for you -- and your side won -- you are called a 'Leader', Prime Minister, President & Commander-in-Chief. If your side lost, you are then called a Sociopath and a War Criminal by the winners.
4. The very rich & powerful -- The Elite (TPTB) -- apply whatever label-of-convenience. The masses/sheep simply echo those labels most of the time and salute that 'flag-of-convenience'.
Unpleasant perhaps, but 100% true. Learn to embrace the Truth. It will make you a better/real human being. One hopes.
There are lots of motives cheap bridesmaid dresses why other brides opt to possess unique casual wedding dresses. Apart from staying much less challenging in terms of designs, casual cheap wedding dresses are fairly very affordable when compared with designer beach wedding dresses. So, why they desire this kind of dresses