Shooting at Dark Knight in CO. What is WRONG with some people?

[GO-NAD!]

My point was not that you should read Jones, but that you become aware of the Executive Orders that diminish personal freedoms. You asked where did I see creeping tyranny. I see it in some of those Executive Orders, as one example. Note that I did not initially link to that page...because I wanted you to investigate those Orders and provide your own opinion. But you didn't want to google them. Thus, I linked to a page that had a few of the Orders listed so you didn't have to actually search. The data is there...you don't need to suck in his right-wingedness.

If you don't want to do any study, investigation, or data presentation regarding the accuracy and support of your or my statements or opinions, that's fine by me. But I'm just not into opinions without regard to evidence or increasing knowledge. "I think" doesn't change people's minds about issues. Opinions are like ... well, you know ... everyone has one. That's why simply sharing opinions will never result in persuasion or agreement. So we continue to disagree.

Aaaah, point taken. The reason I didn't want to get into the stat vs stat argument, is that it's time consuming. So yes, I'm lazy. Guilty as charged.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Some situations are inevitable. For example the experiment shown below shows just how easy it is to turn good people into oppressors. Even in Canada you have the political correctness police and courts who's job is to suppress politically "incorrect" speech and punish those that would dare speak politically incorrect thoughts. As you can see that even in enlightened Canadians can ride down the slippery slope to oppression. You can also see the rapid rise of the thought-police state in the UK and in Australia.

I'm aware of that experiment and other similar ones. Don't know if the results are directly transferable though.

As for the reference to the human rights tribunal, you'll see that Levant won his case - and rightly so. The relevant legislation has since been struck down as unconstitutional. This where the checks and balances prove themselves.

 

[GO-NAD!]

"""I THINK""" you or I can speculate all we want. History teaches lessons. If one doesn't know it, one is bound to repeat it. (Have you heard that before?) Your understanding of history is not correct. Russia was a monarchy (just like your parent Britain) before an armed populace overthrew it. When guns were then taken away, a totalitarian regime replaced it. Germany was a freedom-loving Democracy before Hitler became dictator (as a result of a financial depression). And you certainly don't understand the Second Amendment to our Constitution, or don't want to accept that it is indeed that .357 in my drawer and millions of others that keeps us in liberty.

Also, you do remember that the POTUS is Commander-In-Chief of the U.S. military (and all that power suggests), don't you?! And you should also be aware that the current POTUS, when he was campaigning, was calling for a citizen militia, as well armed and as large as the active military. What do you suppose that was all about? Does it make you even a little suspicious?

We (U.S. posters) have provided information that supports our contentions in this thread. I find you to be intelligent and articulate, G-N. But I really wish you would do more than speculate based upon your opinions (in this thread). Nothing wrong with opinions, mind you. They go pretty good in a sports bar over a cold brew.

There is no comparison between those two monarchies during that era. Russia was was a feudal society at the time of the revolution. They went from one dictatorship to another. The Germans had a very brief period of unstable democracy, before jumping into the arms of Hitler, who was elected into power and then seized total control. Yes, I'm aware of the history. The authoritarian mindset was still there. I still believe that the democratic values of the US citizen are what will preserve your freedom.

 

[Tomorrow]

There is no comparison between those two monarchies during that era. Russia was was a feudal society at the time of the revolution. They went from one dictatorship to another. The Germans had a very brief period of unstable democracy, before jumping into the arms of Hitler, who was elected into power and then seized total control. Yes, I'm aware of the history. The authoritarian mindset was still there. I still believe that the democratic values of the US citizen are what will preserve your freedom.

There were economic stresses on the average people of both societies, in fact on all societies that plunge into totalitarian states. The U.S. (or Canada for that matter) is not immune to such a situation...especially given the economic track of the world today. (America is the world's richest country...and the most indebted.)

You think it is just our good intentions that keep us free, eh? (Talkin' like a Canuck now.) Okay.

 

[Rickster71]

I keep saying that I have no problem with people having their guns! I'm certainly not saying that your rights to have them should be taken away. I just don't think they should be carried around in public.

Wasn't speaking directly to you my friend.
Just tilting at the windmill that's out corrupt news media propagandists, I suppose.
They've been riding the United Nations / One World government gun ban
bandwagon for decades.

 

[Rickster71]

How about study other countries with lower rates to see what they do? Just to be clear, I'm not throwing rocks at you guys. We have our own crime problems up here too. Other than the murder rate, other crime rates are fairly even with you guys. I'm just not convinced that putting more firearms on the street really helps.

Current Worldwide Homicide/Murder Rate

Current Worldwide Homicide/Murder Rate

If I were to believe the news. (I'll call it the news, because I can't spell the puking sound I make when I think of our news media)
I'd think the whole USA is shooting up each other.
In fact, according to the linked graph above, the USA has the second lowest rate!

 

[GO-NAD!]

Wasn't speaking directly to you my friend.

Whew! I wouldn't want something to come between us. I know that Alex is always looking for an opening.

 

[Adam]

Whew! I wouldn't want something to come between us. I know that Alex is always looking for an opening.

I thought that was Alex between you? You know, bridging the difference between our countries. Pervs.

Oops...wrong thread. Guns good, guns bad. Back at it.

 

[GO-NAD!]

There were economic stresses on the average people of both societies, in fact on all societies that plunge into totalitarian states. The U.S. (or Canada for that matter) is not immune to such a situation...especially given the economic track of the world today. (America is the world's richest country...and the most indebted.)

You think it is just our good intentions that keep us free, eh? (Talkin' like a Canuck now.) Okay.

Yes, but during the 20's and 30's, when those other countries went to the dark side, Canada and the US didn't succumb to the same fate. I remain hopeful that we'll all pull through the current economic downturn.

Through good planning or dumb luck, Canada has come through this rough patch relatively unscathed. When we went to Disneyworld in 2010, the lady at US customs said "Please spend lots of money - we need it!". I told her my wife would do her best.

You guys will be OK.

 

[GO-NAD!]

I thought that was Alex between you? You know, bridging the difference between our countries. Pervs.

Oops...wrong thread. Guns good, guns bad. Back at it.

That Rick has a great big di.......

.....plomacy.

 

[mike c]

Current Worldwide Homicide/Murder Rate

Current Worldwide Homicide/Murder Rate

good chart.

there are waaaaaaaaaaaaay less registered guns in the PH (i'm seeing a very small fraction as opposed to the USA per 100 people)

Guns in the Philippines: Facts, Figures and Firearm Law

and yet we have a higher homicide rate than the USA.

that only proves that limiting the legit owners does NOT limit homicide via guns ...

or we're very good at stabbing, hacking and strangling.

 

[GO-NAD!]

that only proves that limiting the legit owners does NOT limit homicide via guns ...

or we're very good at stabbing, hacking and strangling.

All grant you this - you're versatile!

 

[Adam]

or we're very good at stabbing, hacking and strangling.

Okay, after about 30 minutes, I still can't find the darn video that I was looking for. So, here's the transcript.

Scene from Grosse Pointe Blank between Martin and Grosser:

Grocer: Look, I don't want to play against you! This thing is real.

Martin: How real?

Grocer: Maranga Brothers, them, uh, East German ex-Stasi guys...

Marting: Oh, I don't like those guys.

Grocer: Them butch Filipino ladies...

Martin: What, the dwarf, maid...

Grocer: Stabbers! Queens of the hotel hit, you know.

Martin: You got a great crew.

 

[mike c]

Okay, after about 30 minutes, I still can't find the darn video that I was looking for. So, here's the transcript.

Scene from Grosse Pointe Blank between Martin and Grosser:

Grocer: Look, I don't want to play against you! This thing is real.

Martin: How real?

Grocer: Maranga Brothers, them, uh, East German ex-Stasi guys...

Marting: Oh, I don't like those guys.

Grocer: Them butch Filipino ladies...

Martin: What, the dwarf, maid...

Grocer: Stabbers! Queens of the hotel hit, you know.

Martin: You got a great crew.

i coincidentally watched that specific scene the other day

 

[Rickster71]

Didn't mean to go all 'Uni-Bomber Manifesto' about media bias.
I'll have to endeavor not to drink in the AM before posting. j/k

Don't want to rant about a bias media without backing it up a little.

Below IMO a couple of examples:

On the first day of the shooting ABC news claimed , that there was a guy named James Holmes registered as a Tea Party member.
It turned out not to be the same guy.
The fact that they reported it without really knowing, and that they went (of all places) to search for Tea Party affiliation, tells me there is a systemic bias.

Another, example, is how the safe and successful use of a firearm for protection is rarely or never reported.
How do I know this?

The NRA magazine dedicates a page or two each month to 8 to 12 instances of actual home defense, called 'The Armed Citizen.'
Stories taken from local newspapers that never make nation news.

How is that a 12 year old, home alone after school, defends herself with a gun from a home intruder never makes national news?
Yet another 12 Y O that gets shot accidentally makes national news.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Didn't mean to go all 'Uni-Bomber Manifesto' about media bias.
I'll have to endeavor not to drink in the AM before posting. j/k

Don't want to rant about a bias media without backing it up a little.

Below IMO a couple of examples:

On the first day of the shooting ABC news claimed , that there was a guy named James Holmes registered as a Tea Party member.
It turned out not to be the same guy.
The fact that they reported it without really knowing, and that they went (of all places) to search for Tea Party affiliation, tells me there is a systemic bias.

Another, example, is how the safe and successful use of a firearm for protection is rarely or never reported.
How do I know this?

The NRA magazine dedicates a page or two each month to 8 to 12 instances of actual home defense, called 'The Armed Citizen.'
Stories taken from local newspapers that never make nation news.

How is that a 12 year old, home alone after school, defends herself with a gun from a home intruder never makes national news?
Yet another 12 Y O that gets shot accidentally makes national news.

I like to get my news from different sources (I'm a bit of a news junkie). I find that to have a chance of piecing together a somewhat balanced view of any particular topic, you have to go to different sources. That includes sources that don't all share the same political bent. If you only get your news from one viewpoint, you're doing yourself a disservice. At least, that's my take on it.

 

[j_garcia]

And here come the politicians. There's the red flag, and unfortunately, it will apply to me (and most of my friends who are shooters) if it passes:

Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg on Monday continued his lead role in advancing gun control legislation in the wake of the Aurora, Colo. mass shooting by introducing a bill to ban the online sale of ammunition.

"If someone wants to purchase deadly ammunition, they should have to come face-to-face with the seller," Lautenberg stated in his announcement. "It's one thing to buy a pair of shoes online, but it should take more than a click of the mouse to amass thousands of rounds of ammunition."

"The Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act" asserts the following: ammunition will only be sold by licensed dealers; buyers who are not licensed dealers will be required to present photo identification; and licensed dealers must maintain records of ammunition sales and report to officials the sale of more than 1,000 rounds to an unlicensed person. Democratic Rep. Carolyn McCarthy of New York, whose husband was killed and son severely injured in the 1993 Long Island Rail Road mass shooting, has signed on to publicly support the bill.

I don't mind controls, but the politicians are still going after the wrong things. If it passes, I will have to talk my local shop into selling me 999 rounds at a time.

 

[markw]

And here come the bills:

I live in Jersey and have no problem saying that Lautenberg is a first rate sphincter. And, I'm far from anti gun, and don't mind realistic gun controls either.

And, I don't think buying guns and ammo anonymously on the Internet is a good idea, either. That makes it jut a little too easy. I'll give the old bat that much.

But, what Lautenberg suggests is useless. Unless someone has something on their record that makes it illegal to buy this stuff, you just cannot refuse to sell it. They can say you're denying them their rights.

Granted, in this state you need papers to buy this stuff but once that hurdle is cleared, what's to stop them?

In the case of this red-headed whacko, I don't think his buying this stuff in person would have made a difference. There was nothing in his records that would have stopped anyone for selling him arms.

Now, as for the quantities he purchased, well, I think someone was asleep at the wheel, but did anyone break any laws? Technically, I don't think so, but I think some work could be done on this matter .

 

[CaliHwyPatrol]

I live in Jersey and have no problem saying that Lautenberg is a first rate sphincter. And, I'm far from anti gun, and don't mind realistic gun controls either.

And, I don't think buying guns and ammo anonymously on the Internet is a good idea, either. That makes it jut a little too easy. I'll give the old bat that much.

Why not? Without a gun, ammo is useless. If you qualify to buy a gun, then you qualify to buy ammo. I don't know how easy it is to buy a gun online though, I've never looked into it.

But, what Lautenberg suggests is useless. Unless someone has something on their record that makes it illegal to buy this stuff, you just cannot refuse to sell it. They can say you're denying them their rights.

You can refuse to sell anything. However, the buyer will just go to someone else who will sell.

Granted, in this state you need papers to buy this stuff but once that hurdle is cleared, what's to stop them?

In the case of this red-headed whacko, I don't think his buying this stuff in person would have made a difference. There was nothing in his records that would have stopped anyone for selling him arms.

Exactly. Unfortunately, to try and prevent things like this from happening, you have to start infringing on the rights of all those people who aren't going to go on a killing spree.

Now, as for the quantities he purchased, well, I think someone was asleep at the wheel, but did anyone break any laws? Technically, I don't think so, but I think some work could be done on this matter .

Do what? What could anyone have possibly done? Nobody could have done anything to this guy. Say he got flagged by some system for buying that much ammo, and he was questioned about it. All he has to say is that he bought it because he wanted to and there's not a damn thing anyone could do about it. What are you going to do, arrest him? Investigate him? For what?

If someone came knocking on my door asking why I bought that much ammo, I'd tell them to go **** themselves. Arrest me and you're going to have a nasty lawsuit on your hands.

I really wish psychos wouldn't use guns, there are easier ways to kill people. Drive your car through a parade or something. Obviously I would rather them not do any of that, but leave my guns out of it!

 

[Adam]

"It's one thing to buy a pair of shoes online, but it should take more than a click of the mouse to amass thousands of rounds of ammunition."

I bet that guy was wearing shoes, too. If you're going to ban stuff, do it right.