Anti-gun groups merge

[Dave Workman]

Anti-gun groups merge; should they focus on 'Fast & Furious?'

Yesterday's announcement that the anti-gun Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence was merging with Americans for Responsible Solutions, the organization founded by former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and husband Mark Kelly, would be good news if the groups would focus their attention on an Obama administration scandal that is still costing lives.

<broken link removed>

Read More

 

[tac]

I have to ask how the hell Loughner passed a background check...

Quote - 'Acquaintances said that Loughner's personality had changed markedly in the years prior to the shooting, a period when he was also abusing alcohol and drugs. He had been suspended from Pima Community College in September 2010 because of his bizarre behavior and disruptions in classes and the library...'

Say what you like about the yUK, but a nut-job like him would not have been allowed to have a water gun...

tac

 

[nammac]

All I can say is there's no group or groups that want to hold the Obama Administration responsible for Fast N Furious... That's the NRA and gun nuts fault for those arms ending up in the wrong hands on the other side of the border... If it weren't for all those straw purchases... We all know that (ok sarcasm is off now).

I won't broach the mental health issue nor the fractured reporting of such issues... Simply would take more time than I currently have free....

Suffice it to say, there needs to be some mandate that makes these records available for background checks... Unfortunately the system is riddled with flaws...

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

I have to ask how the hell Loughner passed a background check...

Quote - 'Acquaintances said that Loughner's personality had changed markedly in the years prior to the shooting, a period when he was also abusing alcohol and drugs. He had been suspended from Pima Community College in September 2010 because of his bizarre behavior and disruptions in classes and the library...'

Say what you like about the yUK, but a nut-job like him would not have been allowed to have a water gun...

tac

How about a knife? How about gasoline? How about a baseball bat? How about a vehicle? How about a hammer? How about a chair?.. Say what you want, but Im quite sure those determined enough find a way. We're also a much larger and much more diverse country than that European stepping stone.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

I have thought and stated for a while now , that we need to start looking at "Why Johnny thought the answer to his problem was to kill someone or several someone's" as it were.
I still think that should be the focus of the issue. Not what gun was used or what gun restrictions we need now ...

What made someone think that killing was the best answer?
Is it movies , video games ,lack of a sense of responsibility , lax parenting , no sense of self purpose ...
The list is endless.
I think all of the above and more all plays a part.
But I do wonder at our culture and its view / glorification of violence.
I do believe its not a "gun" problem , but a "violence" problem.

Dead is dead , hurt is hurt.
In the end does it really matter if it was a gun that was used or a rock?
Someone was a victim of violence , period.
If we can find the why , maybe we can find some answers to prevent another crime.
Andy

 

[Caveman Jim]

I believe what Tac may have been meaning, and if I'm wrong please tell me, that at least they will not likely do mass killings (with a gun). Sure they can get a knife, cars, gas & fertilizer to do their bizzaro bidding but it would take some of the pressures off of guns and focus on the mentally challenged people (where it should have been all along) instead of us law abiding gun owners (who just want to be left alone)....

 

[Caveman Jim]

I have thought and stated for a while now , that we need to start looking at "Why Johnny thought the answer to his problem was to kill someone or several someone's" as it were.
I still think that should be the focus of the issue. Not what gun was used or what gun restrictions we need now ...

What made someone think that killing was the best answer?
Is it movies , video games ,lack of a sense of responsibility , lax parenting , no sense of self purpose ...
The list is endless.
I think all of the above and more all plays a part.
But I do wonder at our culture and its view / glorification of violence.
I do believe its not a "gun" problem , but a "violence" problem.

Dead is dead , hurt is hurt.
In the end does it really matter if it was a gun that was used or a rock?
Someone was a victim of violence , period.
If we can find the why , maybe we can find some answers to prevent another crime.
Andy

Exactly, we need some definitive answers to their madness to see what is needed for a fix.

 

[bbbass]

But I do wonder at our culture and its view / glorification of violence.
I do believe its not a "gun" problem , but a "violence" problem.

There has always been people that wanted violence, to kill or hurt or whatever. Throughout history this has waxed and waned. Why do people want to do violence... the list is endless. Back when I was a pup, lil Randy wanted a Red Ryder BBgun to protect his family and community from Black Bart. We played cops and robbers, and army men. We brought .22 rifles to school to go hunting after. We got in harmless schoolyard scrapes and didn't try to kill each other later. The difference today? Glorification of a diff type of violence. Then there were clear cut ideas about who the good guys and bad guys were. Now, the bad guys are good, the good guys are bad. Young people can't even decide what gender they are much less have a scorecard for moral issues. Blame who? Plenty to go around!!!!

Why do some crazy people want to kill? No simple answers. No psychiatrist ever has been or will be can figure that out. Might as well ask why a supposedly docile dog suddenly attacks.

IMO the big picture is that because of world wide communications, media and travel, it seems, seems, seems, as tho we are swimming in a sea of violence. Yet on a level of mass murder, it is really not statistically significant. It is emotionally significant tho. Bigger statistically is the rate of gang violence. And that one is not all that hard to figure out.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

bbbass,
I like your thought of "Glorification of a diff type of violence.
I too played with army men , cops and robbers and got into many a scuffle at school when growing up.
All the while having easy access to guns , knives etc ... and not once resorted to using them in a violent act.
So just what is the difference in violence from what we experienced as youths and today's America?
What kept / keeps thousands of other who grew similarly from committing violent crimes?

I know why I do not commit violent acts , but my answer comes from me and my experiences as a kid or from several combat tours while in the Army.
Andy

 

[bbbass]

So just what is the difference in violence from what we experienced as youths and today's America?
What kept / keeps thousands of other who grew similarly from committing violent crimes?

One simple answer of many: empathy vs lack of empathy. Another: a fear of loss at being shamed or removed from peers, community, etc. This is not so today. Especially when you have people that dream of going out in a blaze of glory.

We have gone a long way down the river to the sea, brother... is there any prospect of being able to paddle back?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

bbbass,
I agree on a lack of empathy.
Or a lack of being able to put someone or something before themselves.
I do hope we can paddle back ...
Andy

 

[ZigZagZeke]

I have to ask how the hell Loughner passed a background check...

Quote - 'Acquaintances said that Loughner's personality had changed markedly in the years prior to the shooting, a period when he was also abusing alcohol and drugs. He had been suspended from Pima Community College in September 2010 because of his bizarre behavior and disruptions in classes and the library...'

Say what you like about the yUK, but a nut-job like him would not have been allowed to have a water gun...

tac

In 1970 he would not have been walking the streets. We had mental hospitals where he would have been locked away for treatment.

 

[etrain16]

I don't see any chance of dealing with the issue of crazy people shooting up schools, etc., until we get serious about mental health care. And by serious, I don't mean speeches from blowhard politicians about what they'll do if they're elected, or people screaming in the streets that "something needs to be done". I'm talking about putting money back into mental health care. I mean re-opening asylums for the worst of the worst. I mean increasing inpatient facility space for those that can be treated, but need to have an extended stay. I mean stopping the B.S. talk about their 'rights' and considering the rights of others to be kept safe from unrestrained psychotics. Anti gun groups have focused huge amounts of resources into changing laws to restrict law-abiding, mentally stable people. If they would turn those enormous resources to caring for the mentally ill, then I do believe this problem would, in a large part, go away. And the rights of the rest of us would remain intact.

 

[Stomper]

Richard Prior had a bit about visiting a prison once.

He asked the big "brotha", "why did you kill everyone in the house?"

The big "brutha" answered, "well they was home."

Richard Prior said, "thank GOD we have penitentiaries!!

 

[Lilhigbee]

Say what you like about the yUK, but a nut-job like him would not have been allowed to have a water gun...

tac

If the choice is between the occasional nut-job getting a gun that shouldn't have one and the tyranny you live under, I'll take the nut-job any day. At least with them I am on equal footing if I take the responsibility to try to defend myself and family. Under your tyranny, where a man can get life in prison for obvious self-defense, I would have no chance.

 

[nammac]

I don't see any chance of dealing with the issue of crazy people shooting up schools, etc., until we get serious about mental health care. And by serious, I don't mean speeches from blowhard politicians about what they'll do if they're elected, or people screaming in the streets that "something needs to be done". I'm talking about putting money back into mental health care. I mean re-opening asylums for the worst of the worst. I mean increasing inpatient facility space for those that can be treated, but need to have an extended stay. I mean stopping the B.S. talk about their 'rights' and considering the rights of others to be kept safe from unrestrained psychotics. Anti gun groups have focused huge amounts of resources into changing laws to restrict law-abiding, mentally stable people. If they would turn those enormous resources to caring for the mentally ill, then I do believe this problem would, in a large part, go away. And the rights of the rest of us would remain intact.

We have a winner folks!!!!!! etrain you have hit at the heart of the problem! I wish I could give you a thousand likes for this post! We have to take care of the inflicted operators, not the equipment...

 

[Stomper]

LMAO... Who's "strain"?

 

[nammac]

Say what you like about the yUK, but a nut-job like him would not have been allowed to have a water gun...
tac

tac, I've enjoyed your posts and perspective on things. And you are
correct, we do still have a Bill of Rights, that's something we as Americans cannot compromise on.

What we have is a mental health crisis, brought to us by our government. The closure of state run hospitals starting in the 1970's coupled with the explosion of pharmaceutical treatment only has created an epidemic of mental health issues here in the States. If the root cause were addressed, we'd not need to infringe on the rights of law abiding citizens. But that's not the agenda...

Why should my rights be taken away for someone who has mental health issues? What would be next, loose additional rights or freedoms because of someone's drug addiction, or someone's membership in a street gang? How about because of civil unrest, portestung or rioting???

Irradicate the root cause and leave the law abiding alone, we Americans need to be diligent to not go down the same path as the UK... Lest we will be registering air soft pistols as well...

After all, isn't that what the American Revelotuion was about, being freemen??? I prefer keeping that status... Until we're forced to repeat April 1775, again...

 

[nammac]

We have a winner folks!!!!!! you have hit at the heart of the problem! I wish I could give you a thousand likes for this post! We have to take care of the inflicted operators, not the equipment...

LMAO... Who's "strain"?

thanks for the catch, should have been etrain... Dang autocorrect creates more work than it saves!

 

[Dave Workman]

For those commenting and steering this thread toward mental health, I encourage you to read this (maybe some folks didn't read my original column... )
This is a story done by Susannah Frame over at KING. She's a good reporter.

http://www.king5.com/story/news/loc...velopmental-disability-civil-rights/81947398/