You can't blame or even say video games contribute simply because they are an 'at risk youth.' The issue isn't the video game. It's the at risk youth. Why is he at risk? What are the contributing factors there? That's the issue. That's where the rubber does not meet the road. Blaming video games is like blaming rock music. By all means, do it. It's political suicide in the end. Looking at some of the 'by the state' numbers, I find it so interesting that some of the states with the toughest gun legislation and still so high on the gun violence lists. Of course, apologists will say that the bad people just go to states where the gun laws are more lax. That absurd notion, while possibly even being true, underscores the larger issue that bad people will exhaust their resources to obtain weaponry (in any number of forms) to inflict damage and perpetuate their damage in an effort to boost their self-esteem or fill their void. With the notable exception of the Chinese, there's no power more terrifying than that of the American government. Have you ever seen a DEA unit or Anti-Gang task force go rolling through a neighborhood? We were patrolling Baghdad with less force. No, the American population needs the right to protect themselves...be it from foreign or domestic threats. We should fear the latter much more, in my opinion.
So, we all know who the bad people are, even though it is often after the fact as it was in Ct. But who are the good people? Is it simply the card carrying NRA member? Or the guy who goes through the long, drawn out process we have in NJ to buy a gun? Or the fellow that can buy what he needs in many Wal-Marts or Dick's stores around the country with little or no documentation? Does being a veteran automatically qualify you as a "good" guy? Or a being a concerned father? A righteous homeowner? Maybe you are the paper target champion at the local range or gun club and based on that, you can be trusted as a "good" person. What is the first thing everyone says after one of these mass murders..... gee, he seemed like a good guy. Maybe a little quiet but he was a good neighbor. Again, I appreciate the wisdom of the 2nd amendment. But this is 2012 and for decades now we have championed violence in its many forms. Be it Tarantino movies, Call to Duty I,II or II, zombie shows, the nightly news or incredible tragedies like we just experienced, we are becoming accepting of this in our lives. In my view we are on the cusp of all-out anarchy. I refuse to live my life like Crockett at the Alamo. I am not turning my home into an armory. That's not living, that's preparing to die. I watched several episodes of a prepper show the other day; those people are nuts. Who wants to live underground for months on end like a mole only to surface to a desolate world? Not me, brothers. When it gets to this we need to ask ourselves is it all worthwhile....
I don't disagree with any of that....but we have to operate within rational tolerances for a civilized society and clearly right now we are not. I mean where do we draw the limits? A predator drone in every garage, chemical agents by the drum in every basement, fissionable material under lock and key in the closets of every home in the US? Protect ourselves from the man, right? In the meantime, our society is destroying itself.....from within.....under the guise of protecting itself. I don't buy it....the availability of guns are not THE problem, but they are a factor in what has become a MASSIVE problem in our society and we need to take a hard look at many, many long held and closely-held beliefs..... The data is compelling....what we have right now isn't working. The slaughter of dozens of babies at school is a redline for me fellas.....we need to change and everybody needs to step up. Meanwhile, this is what we were shooting last night.....100 rounds in two very sad-looking towelheaded terrorist bad guys. Very cool, very light, very accurate and very fun......but....
The key word there is "live". If I'm going to be a subject to rather than a citizen of the government, that is not living.
BT my good friend I cannot believe that you ridicule Tom for hyperbole and rhetoric and at the same time talk about predator drones in garages, chemical wepons in basements, and nukes or whatever. The AR-15 is the most popular and versatile rifle in America, owned by millions of responsible citizens for legitimate purposes. I believe in my right to own one. I. believe that the Constitution gves me the right to own one. I do not believe that it is a killing machine for crazies and I don't believe tht banning it would in any way improve the safety of our children in our schools.
Look at Stu being all reasonable and nice. It must be the holidays So back to the rumble I see what you're saying, but who are we to draw these limits? Why are we limiting one thing, while completely ignoring what you said yourself that you agree with? That is what gets me. We say 'well yes, this is the real problem' but then we do nothing about the actual issue. People will always be drawn to the taboo like moths to a flame. The moment you make something taboo, here come the moths that otherwise would have ignored it. In the interim, those moths will now be criminalized and we are now creating even more cost overhead in a society that is leaking from the attic with overhead. I believe in treatment for those who are in need, and ridicule for those deserving. Somehow, we just seem to lose track of these things. I think what's changed is the media and how we let it affect us. There are basic elements of humanity and evil, greed, corruption and violence are certainly a few of them. We punish the society and praise the sinner these days. How the hell did we get to here? What guides us to steer the ship into the rock lined shore all the while making us believe we're doing 'the right thing?' It's the media; pure, plain and simple. However, the real issue is us. WE let it affect us like this. I know Dave mentioned a bit ago (and several times before that) about how 'right wing' FoxNews is. He's correct. They are. They are clearly biased. Furthermore, they publish some stories that are seriously bat ****, if not downright disreputable. THAT BEING SAID The popularity of FoxNews arose out of a very real void in this country. I'll avoid the term 'main stream media' to try to keep the tin foil hat label off my head and just say 'the entire rest of the effing media' is so far off the reservation that is simply does not resonate with a majority of the media watching population. The remainder, and by that again I mean all but FoxNews, also publishes lies, slander and fabrication pieces. Each has its loyal side because people want to belong. Human beings long to belong, it defines our existence to a large extent. The problem is that when people belong without question, they are susceptible to be exploited. That is what we're seeing here, people being exploited by each respective side. The talking box and it's older, uglier sister the newspaper keep us running to protect or condemn one thing after the other and no one seems to be willing to stick to the real issue. That's all understandable. You really have to think differently, in order to be able to step back and use critical analysis on the situation. Quite often, we have people who just think that way naturally... but they don't fit in, so they are marginalized in this society. Heaven forbid they have some sort of psychological condition that may actually require treatment, because that will just marginalize them further. Sooner or later, those people feel pushed to the extreme of the margins to such an extent that they want to destroy everything in the middle, or at a minimum everything they feel is pushing them to the margin. I think it's a fair response, really. I mean, when you look at their existence, they feel pushed and forced. It's only natural that at some point in time, they'll do what they've seen done to them.. they pushed back. We don't ask why, we don't treat them and we don't like to hear what they have to say until it's too late. That's a pity, really because had someone listened or treated that person, they just might have been that person to be the next Twain, or Mencken or Jay. Instead, we label them monsters and bitch about our society (as if excusing our own position in society by simply completing this act) and we try to figure out what tangible item is really to blame when the item is really us all along. That's my opinion, anyway.
I own this exact weapon: I don't have it for home protection or in case my government goes haywire. I have it because I enjoy blowing holes in paper targets when I can't blow holes in the growing scourge down here - Wild pigs. Obama wants to take it away. I can assure you a $200 buyback isn't going to cover it. Simple economics says I won't give it up before you get into all the other issues you guys are discussing...
Doesn't matter why you own it. You could own it for varmint shooting, plinking, target shooting, competition shooting, home defense, or a SHTF gun. The point is that the Constitution gives you the right to own it.
I'm sure the mom in Ct had her reasons for owing her legally purchased gun as well. Right up to the minute her psycho kid took it from her, pumped four into her face point blank and then drove to a classroom full of 6-7 year olds and pumped 3-11 shots from her assault rifle into each of them. But hey, if dry humping one of these Rambo rifles makes you feel safe in your house, then I guess that's all that matters. I am curious about one thing... which country are you expecting the invasion from? And be careful.. you could hurt yourself with one of those things.
George, you can "dry hump" whatever you want. My gun is for killing wild pigs. I can assure you a 22 isn't going to do the job on a 300lb boar. It would just piss him off, and that's not even considering the pack he's running with that will also want to kill you. What's the difference in the gun I pictured, and a .306 deer rifle? Mine can hold 4 more rounds and has as slightly shorter barrel. That's it. I'm sorry Lanza'a Mom didn't secure her weapons from an unstable son. Her actions and those of the killer are no reflection on me. I'm not an advocate for automatic weapons, or large capacity magazines. My humble opinion is those only have military purposes and should not be for regular public use...
Scott, Although the AK platform is not my favorite, it is robust and can be thrown in a mud hole and still fire. For that, it owns a place in one of my two long gun safes. I have a third safe for handguns. The only guns that are out of the safe are the ones that are in use for personal protection. AR platform is my favorite. I have a piston driven that is cooler running than the AK and is just as reliable. I can hit a .410 shotgun shell at 200 yards 4 out of 5 shots. Gun control is being able to hit that at which you are aiming. How's that for hyperbole and rhetoric?
I took up boar hunting for stress relief. I use a crossbow and 2 types of knife. I can pretty much split the cornea of anything within the 30 yard range. I can draw, cock and fire nearly as fast, if not faster, than many gun owners can draw their weapon and remove the safety. If you put one of these in my hands http://www.parkerbows.com/crossbows.html?action=detail&detailsku=1109 I could do a lot of damage real fast to some hogs. I'd bet dollars to donuts that this is a far more effective short range killing machine, at least in my hands.. should we ban those as well? I'm telling ya, put Scott's gun in my hands and you're probably looking at a 40-50% chance in close quarters that I'd miss you and you'd escape. Put that bow in my hands in that same scenario and you're dead.
Scott, it was the PS90, the semi version with a 30 round mag. Fun stuff.... Stu, re: hyperbole...fair enough. My intent was simply to reflect upon what seemed to be the core of the position that the weapons were necessary to defend against an oppressive government. The point being that if it is the intent to maintain the ability to defend against the resources of any modern nation state, guns alone are no match...why then should citizens not have the right to similar weaponry? Corey, I agree....it is pure folly to address the gun side of the issue in isolation. The problem with the NRA's position from a political standpoint, if they don't put forth some viable alternatives, they are going to get steamrolled by a pissed off citizenry who will then likely address the path of least resistance....the gun dimension. My view is that to take any meaningful steps to resolve the issue, changes need to be made along multiple dimensions. If there is no movement from the gun lobby, the gun lobby will get rolled and the other issues will be left unattended and the problem facing our society unresolved..... There are other models that have been shown to be effective.....I for one don't believe the Brits, Germans, French, Danes, Swedes, Czhecks, Austrians, Norwegians, Irish, Dutch, Australians, Kiwis, et al live in fear of being crushed by an oppressive nation state....relative to the UK and France, our rate of gun related deaths is almost 50X greater...... Australia 21X, Canada 6X.....I see no reason we can't learn from what has worked in other societies. Just saying no is not a rational option, imho.....
:lol: Touche'..... That said, we need a solution. If the gun lobby doesn't pose one or come to the table with options, it's clear to me that one will be posed for them and it will likely be much worse than any they could have conceived on their own ......in my view, and I hope we all can agree, that doing nothing is not an option.
Not my stage pal, it is everybody's problem, everybody's stage......given what has just taken place and the mood the country, doing nothing is simply not an option.
Interesting enough, many of those nations you mentioned have been crushed before by oppressive nation states. Those who've not been crushed were actually the oppressive nation state. There are those that have been both. The population of England is a little over 53.000,000 as of 2011. The population of the United States is/was 311,591,000. We are entirely different civilizations and interestingly enough, I found in a gun debate with a friend of mine recently that the English might well be skewing their gun numbers. There's been a significant number of homicides ruled as being 'of unknown instrument' even when all evidence points towards gun shot. I'm sure it's not a huge number overall, but it was statistically significant. Especially when you consider that England is roughly the size (population wise) as California and Florida combined.
BT, I am open to suggestions. Just saying that one side has to give up everything and not having a plan for the other side is just like Obama expecting everything from the GOP while he gives not an inch in the fiscal cliff issue. I'll start the ball rolling. This is my plan so what do you have that is better? My four step plan to make the war on crime actually work: Step one - Make it mandatory for everyone to be able to defend themselves. Have them take responsibility for their own safety. I'm not referring to guns here. Self defense courses do not have to be gun related. The more people fight back, the less motivated the criminals will be to attack. Step two - Up the regulations for being able to obtain a gun legally. Right now, if you have been convicted of a class 1 misdemeanor in the past 10 years, or ever convicted of a felony, you can't buy a modern firearm. That does not take into account any propensity for committing these crimes. Maybe there should be some psychological evaluation as long as it can be made objective rather than subjective. Step three - Reserve officer training for those more inclined to be sheep dogs. We have volunteer firemen and we do have reserve police officers in certain areas of the country already. Increase that force since they are unpaid, the only cost is the training. That training is the same that every other police officer in the country receives. Have a large neough and diverse enough force that their available time covers the whole 24 hour spectrum. Station those officers at the most vulnerable points on the map. Step four - Remove LEGALLY carried gun restrictions everywhere. You have made the process for getting a permit more intensive. Now let those people have the ability to carry anywhere. Whether they do or not, it eliminates the "gun free zones" where these killings normally occur. Nothing we say here on the Skybox is going to make a difference. However, if we could come to a well thought out answer to the problem, maybe the idiots we elect can do so as well. We could do as China does... death penalty for possession of one round of ammunition of any kind. The police come into a bar when there is a disturbance and start beating heads in and ask questions afterwards to find out who to take to jail after they get out of the hospital. If you don't speak enough Chinese to communicate with the police, you were part of the problem and go to jail. You might think I am exaggerating but this has happened eight times that I personally know of from students winding up in the Xian jail system. Make guns illegal and we are headed in the same direction.