I will say it again - the extreme, unreasonable views apply to both sides here.
OT: Active shooter(s) on the loose after mass shooting in San Bernadino....
- Thread starter pitt-girl
- Start date
See, those are good ideas that fit. It's all about money and power though, not culture.
I never suggested it doesn't get done the right way so I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. I happen to agree - 100%.
Like it or not, these incidents are good for business and they know.[/QUOTE]
I tend to agree. Anytime that a prominent politician makes a speech mentioning gun control, gun sales go thru the roof. And if anyone bothers to research it, they'd see that the gun lobby has a ton of legislators in their back pocket. They contribute to their coffers, and they threaten that they'll give a lot of money to the politician's opponent if they don't toe the line.
Anyone who refers to the wishes of our Founding Fathers conveniently forgets that in 1776, the firearm of choice was the musket - not the AK-47. Anyone have stats on how many mass shootings were because of "rapid-fire muskets"?
The same people who are about "rights" are the same people who both: (1) supported the closing of mental hospitals; and (2) weakened the gun laws so that it's become easier for the mentally deranged to get guns.
Fr
Freedom of speech IS regulated you can't scream fire in a movie theatre and people can be subject to slander or libel suits should they overstep their rights...
No one says ban all guns... But waiting periods background checks and the practicality of certain semi automatic weapons has to be questioned... The 2nd admendment was written when the entire notion of mass shooting was not possible...
Making false argument won't help yet this morning the chairman of arms services from TX not only saying he knew nothing of the semi automatic weapons used.. He them tried to deflect saying his shotgun is semi automatic...the people questioning him looked really tired of the same.old.lines and excuses... Everyone has heard them thousands of times...
Then false narrative rolls out of wanting to ban all firearms and end result is nothing happens... At all...
Freedom of speech IS regulated you can't scream fire in a movie theatre and people can be subject to slander or libel suits should they overstep their rights...
No one says ban all guns... But waiting periods background checks and the practicality of certain semi automatic weapons has to be questioned... The 2nd admendment was written when the entire notion of mass shooting was not possible...
Making false argument won't help yet this morning the chairman of arms services from TX not only saying he knew nothing of the semi automatic weapons used.. He them tried to deflect saying his shotgun is semi automatic...the people questioning him looked really tired of the same.old.lines and excuses... Everyone has heard them thousands of times...
Then false narrative rolls out of wanting to ban all firearms and end result is nothing happens... At all...
You quoted a post about RFID chips and fingerprint technology. In your eyes, are those extreme views/approaches to decreasing gun violence? Certainly not in my eyes. Nor is better background checks. Nor is banning assault rifles - in my eyes. No average Joe needs AK-47's, and M16's. This isn't Red Dawn.
At least I've put a real idea out there. Thoughts and prayers aren't going to do much and god isn't solving this problem. At some point, real people will need to use their brains to make real changes and it's undeniable that there's an extreme fringe out there that doesn't want to see it happen. Sadly, that fringe has a lot of political power.
I think you jumped over the original point. People here say it's unavoidable. That bad guys will always get their hands on weapons. Well that's not true in other countries. Other places simply aren't experiencing this phenomena so it's facetious to say it's unstoppable Culture is obviously playing a major role so I have no reservations accusing our nations gun culture to be toxic.
If you flooded Canada, or the UK or Germany, or Japan with massive amounts of weaponry, do you think you'd see a spike in gun violence? In my opinion I think you would, but that's just my opinion. Who knows - maybe Americans are just low-down violent people without consciences.
Not to ignore the other mass shootings, but this one individually was completely different and had little to do with America's gun problems. Make no mistake about it, while U.S. citizens, these people were not Americans. They were radical terrorists. In the end I think the main issue that will come to light from this tragedy is terrorism.
They were US citizens that acquired their guns legally.
This particular event would not have been impacted by stricter gun laws at all.
But that doesn't mean that other events wouldn't be impacted.
Agree. Almost every other event was the result of mentally ill Americans getting their hands on guns. This just was not the case here. They were "US citizens", but more than likely only because they were terrorists infiltrating this country. Let's not give them credit and call them one of us.
Wow... yeah and every drunk driver doesn't kill someone else and every this and every that. Doesn't matter... you take it off the streets and market or try to. The Murrysville incident proves that taking guns away from crazy people pushes the severity very low
The male, Farook Syed, was born in the US in 1987. He may have been a muslim terrorist, but he was as American as the guy that shot up Planned Parenthood in Colorado last week. He didn't emigrate here or "infiltrate" this country. He was BORN here. His wife, the female, was NOT born here. They married two years ago. Wouldn't be surprised if she "radicalized" him.
People don't worship guns...they worship freedom, and relate that to self-defense, esp. from gov't. That's better than just blindly following orders. And I don't own firearms. This horror in CA is terrorism, using guns legally purchased. IED's, thousands of rounds, etc. This wasn't just some nutjob with a gun.
____________________
No Darth ... stronger bans on assault rifles I have no problem with. Some on the extreme left (if you want to make it political) want to get rid of all guns, that's what I'm referring to... Do tell me how the "far right" loves to have anything illegally transported here. I used to share your views when I was in school, but I worked in the criminal system for a little while when I first graduated and the reality of criminal element helped shape the opinion I have today. There are a certain percentage of mentally unstable and just plain bad people who are doing this. Better recognition of those individuals and a plan to help them would help immensely in my opinion.
Yes, that appears to be the most likely scenario. The marriage and getting her pregnant was more than likely a master plan to make the female a U.S. Citizen.
There was a good 60 minutes on "smart guns" new technology that allows only the owner to fire the weapon. Pretty cool stuff. It would help but honestly, won't come close to stopping massacres like what we saw yesterday. And the NRA has fought and won the battles of smart guns..
we do? Where? I was referring more to the members of a terrorist organization, Muslim Brotherhood, who are high ranking officials of this administration. but if you want to talk about Obama and where he was born, im cool with that. Ever see his grandmother's quote about her little grandson's birthplace?
Smart guns are garbage. The technology is crap. The wristbands don't synch up properly with the gun and even when they do it can take up to 7 seconds for the gun to recognize the signal once it's in your hand. In those 7 seconds you're either dead, incapacitated, or in a close-up physical struggle if someone is attacking you.
Ah, yes, the old "civilized countries" bit.
1. It's not true.
2. It's a condescending shame tactic that looks down both on other countries - oh, they're not "civilized," what do you expect but for them to kill each other all the time - that doesn't work. You're not going to shame Americans into giving up the second amendment.
What about GPS monitoring on all firearms? If a gun comes within so many feet of a school, shopping center, etc, the cops are dispatched.
A friend of mine from Western Europe told me in his country, you can only carry your gun to and from a firing range or to hunting areas. You cant even stop for gas or to eat. Just go there and then go straight home. The gun aint allowed anywhere else.
Sounds like an awful waste of police resources and a great way to make guns without GPS systems embedded in them a primo item on the black market.
Is your friend from one of those Western European countries that actually has a higher rate of mass shootings than the US? Like Norway and Belgium?
No, and they don't even have fewer than the US. Gun control advocates just want you to think they do.
There's nothing wrong with the 2nd amendment and it will never change! That's the good news!
We do need to do something to monitor individuals with mental disorders. Back in the good old days this was done. Today we've adopted the Euro privacy law system which makes it impossible to id individuals with a mental disorder unless they commit a crime or self report their condition.
Take the example of the Lufthansa Wings pilot who had massive mental issues but his doctor couldn't inform his employer Lufthansa. Result he locked the pilot out of the pilot out of the cockpit and crashed the plane. We have that system in place now in the US. A person has to self report a mental illness on a gun purchase application. The application to purchase a gun doesn't crosscheck against a mental disorder database because one doesn't exist.
Your quote: " There's good solutions out there that could help, but they all get blocked by extreme, unreasonable views."You quoted a post about RFID chips and fingerprint technology. In your eyes, are those extreme views/approaches to decreasing gun violence? Certainly not in my eyes. Nor is better background checks. Nor is banning assault rifles - in my eyes. No average Joe needs AK-47's, and M16's. This isn't Red Dawn.
At least I've put a real idea out there. Thoughts and prayers aren't going to do much and god isn't solving this problem. At some point, real people will need to use their brains to make real changes and it's undeniable that there's an extreme fringe out there that doesn't want to see it happen. Sadly, that fringe has a lot of political power.
That's what I was referencing. Unfortunately you really are only presenting one side of the issue here. I applaud your suggestions but you have yet to respond to the scenario I presented. For all those who point to the right, what about better profiling? Or closing our borders? Or allowing the FBI a larger definition of what constitutes terrorism regardless of the political correctness? What about tracking those with mental illness? The left vigorously resists that. But IMHO from a dedicated moderate and proud non-partisan, stricter gun controls (which I support 100%) only solve a small piece of this without some way to track high risk individuals. What say you?
Pittgirl in my previous post I highlighted the mental illness issue which is a large part of the problem!Excellent suggestion along with profiling etc.
Yes - I saw that. Hopefully you read my longer post earlier about the same thing. Here it was:
My honest opinion is that the solution is somewhere in the middle and those that are the loudest on both sides seem unwilling to meet. I support tougher gun laws, but I also support at this time closing our borders and coming up with a tougher means of profiling. I'm sorry if that's offensive or politically incorrect. When it comes to mental health we as a country need to provide more. Period. Even if it means throwing a bunch of $$ at it. But we also need a way to be able to identify those at risk even if it means violating privacy laws. See how tricky this gets? You can't have it one way without the other.
It is extremely naive to think you can get rid of guns here. It is part of the fabric and history of this country. We were created by violence. If you can't accept that, no laws will ever make you feel better and perhaps relocating to a country that better fits what you need might be more appropriate.
We are very blessed to have a diverse group of friends and family. What I have found is that there are very few who truly are able to compromise on this issue and others. Both sides want to "win"; we have become VERY politically polarized and most seem to be very threatened by meeting in the middle. JMO.
Not sure what scenario you're referring too but I'd be 100% in favor of your other suggestions. Although I'm mostly talking about the typical mass shooter situations, so I'm not sure how closed borders would help - but I'm open-minded about that.
Most if not all countries have a history of war and violence. I don't buy that excuse. Our history is no more bloody than Germany and they've managed to grow up.
I think my overall point is if you believe in restricting basic American fundamental rights, like the ability to own a gun, you must also be willing to restrict other rights, such as privacy. But for whatever reason the right AND the left refuse to budge. I'm actually not sure why the right resists stricter gun controls like closing the loopholes for background checks, longer wait periods and such. Because none of that would have applied to yesterday. Or to what happened in Colorado last week. That way the 100% focus on gun laws shifts to other things that are equally as important but seemingly a non-starter for the left. This whole thing makes me sick and honestly I'm so tired of the vitriol spewed from both sides of this huge crisis.
Last edited:
If you truly believe the Germans are an example of a society who are "grown up" as opposed to Americans, I would move.
Most of the shooting incidents in this country have involved mentally challenged individuals or terrorists in gun free " kill zones."
Talk to a police officer who you know and can level with you.
Law enforcement personal off the record will tell you that they're a great deterent if they're near the scene of a crime, they're great investigators and they'll find the criminals. But it does take time for police to respond if they're not near the crime scene.
For example if you and your family are victims of a home invasion. It will take the average police officier 10-15 minutes to respond. Once on scene the officer waits for a back up officer. No police officier is playing Rambo and charging into a home invasion situation. They have to formulate a plan to address the situation so you're now probably 20 mins into your home invasion by armed assailants. Guess what your dead by that time.
The alternative. You are the victim of a home invasion and your family knows where a weapon is to hold off the invaders to give the police time to arrive, formulate a plan, and take the invaders into custody.
I like the alternative as opposed to being killed!
Guess what police prefer citizens who can help themselves not be victims!
Talk to a police officer who you know and can level with you.
Law enforcement personal off the record will tell you that they're a great deterent if they're near the scene of a crime, they're great investigators and they'll find the criminals. But it does take time for police to respond if they're not near the crime scene.
For example if you and your family are victims of a home invasion. It will take the average police officier 10-15 minutes to respond. Once on scene the officer waits for a back up officer. No police officier is playing Rambo and charging into a home invasion situation. They have to formulate a plan to address the situation so you're now probably 20 mins into your home invasion by armed assailants. Guess what your dead by that time.
The alternative. You are the victim of a home invasion and your family knows where a weapon is to hold off the invaders to give the police time to arrive, formulate a plan, and take the invaders into custody.
I like the alternative as opposed to being killed!
Guess what police prefer citizens who can help themselves not be victims!
Last edited:
Well, it's representative of the mindset that these people have.
It makes them hard.
A quick unofficial Google search shows Germany has a little over 1.0/per 100k firearm related death and the United States has nearly 11.0/per 100k.
