Well...'not gettin' on that treadmill again. Like the ole saying goes: "Let George do it". FF to 01:28 (caution: language):
George Carlin on Global Warming - YouTube
GT40s.com Paddock Politics Thread
- Thread starter Big-Foot
- Start date
- Status
Well...'not gettin' on that treadmill again. Like the ole saying goes: "Let George do it". FF to 01:28 (caution: language):
George Carlin on Global Warming - YouTube
My prayers go out to the survivors of the shootings in Sutherland TX. And my praise to the gentleman who shot and wounded the perpetrator and the young man who chased him. They both saved lives.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
You're guessing -- he'd already killed 25 people and was likely going to off himself (as he did). Don't start the "see guns good narrative!" now. Rifle fire and a high speed chase anywhere other than rural Texas would have likely resulted in more people hurt or killed, not less.
You just can't help yourself can you.
Some of us DO have a problem with vigilanteism (is that a real word??), Al.
As much as I believe that our law enforcement organizations have granted themselves much more lethal authority than they should have, my opinion is that the job of stopping this rampant practice of slaughtering innocent people is best left up to the Law Enforcement community.
Nobody wins in this case...even the individual who shot the perp is showing signs of stress over his choice, and he will have to live with the knowledge that he took a human life ...or, did he? (I think I heard that the perp took his own life...).
I wonder if we need a "Paddock Gun Control" thread...but then, the NRA makes sure that their political agenda gets the best attention that $$ can buy, so maybe gun control IS a political issue?
No winners...no cheers... :thumbsdown:
Doug
As much as I believe that our law enforcement organizations have granted themselves much more lethal authority than they should have, my opinion is that the job of stopping this rampant practice of slaughtering innocent people is best left up to the Law Enforcement community.
Nobody wins in this case...even the individual who shot the perp is showing signs of stress over his choice, and he will have to live with the knowledge that he took a human life ...or, did he? (I think I heard that the perp took his own life...).
I wonder if we need a "Paddock Gun Control" thread...but then, the NRA makes sure that their political agenda gets the best attention that $$ can buy, so maybe gun control IS a political issue?
No winners...no cheers... :thumbsdown:
Doug
Last edited:
So...back to Politics...how many were surprised by the election results yesterday?
Virginia and New Jersey both elected Democratic Governors...and in states where Trump had spent considerable political effort. If the news reports I saw are accurate, it looks like the Repubs have lost their legislative majority, too.
I think the end is near...people have gotten Trump's number and although he will probably always have a "rabidly loyal" following, his popularity numbers in the polls tell the real story...he's not as popular with the American public as he is with himself. Let's hope he's on the way out...and that the Republican party becomes more mainstream.
Cheers!
Doug
Virginia and New Jersey both elected Democratic Governors...and in states where Trump had spent considerable political effort. If the news reports I saw are accurate, it looks like the Repubs have lost their legislative majority, too.
I think the end is near...people have gotten Trump's number and although he will probably always have a "rabidly loyal" following, his popularity numbers in the polls tell the real story...he's not as popular with the American public as he is with himself. Let's hope he's on the way out...and that the Republican party becomes more mainstream.
Cheers!
Doug
The killer still was shooting when he was shot, he still had more ammunition, so the good guy who shot him kept him from killing more people. Vigilante? You have a problem with him stopping the killer? Seriously? Stress over the choice of stopping more killing? I'm sorry Doug, I wouldn't want you to have to face your moral quandary if I were unarmed and being shot at. He did the right thing, I'd definitely would want him around.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Wait a second. Rifle fire in an open public space followed by a high speed chase at 95 mph is the right thing? No. It is not.
Only in cray-cray land is the idea that more guns and more gun fire and more insanity is the only sane response.
Nuts, just absolutely nuts.
Only in cray-cray land is the idea that more guns and more gun fire and more insanity is the only sane response.
Nuts, just absolutely nuts.
The rifle fire stopped the killer. The chase led the police to the killer. And standing by doing nothing? Really? They did the right thing.
We can hope for the best, and maybe, just maybe last night's election results might turn the tide. But until we can pass some common sense gun legislation such as universal backgrounds checks without loopholes on all gun purchases, a "no fly list" for gun purchases, getting rid of bump stocks, etc., these mass killings will unfortunately continue. The statistics show more guns equal more gun deaths. Canada, UK, Japan, Australia, Norway, etc. are all safer countries because of their stricter gun laws.
Also, google the "good guy with a gun" MYTH. Anecdotally, there are instances where a good guy shoots down the bad guy, but there's no empirical evidence that proves the "good guy with a gun" theory.
Also, google the "good guy with a gun" MYTH. Anecdotally, there are instances where a good guy shoots down the bad guy, but there's no empirical evidence that proves the "good guy with a gun" theory.
When only seconds count.......police are just minutes away....
Pat
Supporter
After the NYC Terrorist killed 8 with a Home Depot Truck a week ago where were paddock postings demanding legal mandates before renting or buying a vehicle such as a mandatory 24-hour waiting period on cars, a 72-hour waiting period on trucks and a one month waiting period on all vehicles over 10,000 pounds? And of course any common sensible regulation would include a ban all fully automatic transmissions, no purchases at car shows and a possession of a vehicle requiring bump starting would no doubt be a felony.
Last edited:
Or Dr's that kill 200,000 a year. That was funny Veek.
In this instance there is evidence. Why does the left have such a hard time accepting this? If you were outside of that church, wouldn't you want that guy who risked his life there?
ONCE AGAIN: Give us THEE EXACT wording of a gun law the consequences for violating which, if passed, would strike so much terror in the hearts of crooks and loons that they'd dare not even THINK ABOUT violating it much less DO so...and 'would thereby put and end to gun violence.
If you cannot come up with said law, then for the love of Pete admit what is to the REST of us the O-B-V-I-O-U-S FACT that no gun law - or plethora of individual gun laws - will ever end gun crimes and STOP screaming for/harping on more LAWS, more LAWS, more LAWS.
CRIMINALS DO NOT pay attention to laws. Only law-abiding people do. So how will further eroding the gun rights of LAW-ABIDING PEOPLE cause crooks and loons to change THEIR behavior????????? The 9,487,592 gun laws we already HAVE on the books, INCLUDING THE "GUN-FREE ZONE" LAWS, haven't. What makes you and your ilk think 1 or 2 - or 300 MORE "gun laws" WILL?????????? That's just plain N-U-T-S.
So...cutting thru all the double talk and b.s. ...you're saying it's a "myth" that good guys with guns ENDED the likes of Paddock, Kelly, etc., etc.?
"Good guy with a gun" is more than a "theory". If law agencies actually RECORDED the often overlooked incidents wherein armed good guys stopped/prevented armed bad guys from doing this-or-that there'd be more than ample evidence supporting that fact.
Last edited:
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
I agree. Cars and guns are the same!
So:
1. All guns must be registered with the government. All sales must be reported to the government. Failure to do so, you go to jail.
2. To operate a gun, you must have a license. That means training and background checks and a medical and mental health exam.
3. To own guns, you have to have insurance.
4. If someone steals your guns or otherwise uses them improperly, you are liable for it.
Deal?
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
In dispelling gun nut lunacy with truth? No I can't.
Our nationwide policy response to monthly? weekly? mass shootings just can't be "hope a guy with a gun is close by and he manages to use it in a public space in a way that doesn't injure innocent third parties -- and oh! by the way! high speed chases by public citizens on public roads are A-Ok!"
Sorry. That's not a rational response to these tragedies.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
No. I wouldn't want someone firing a rifle in public or engaging in a 95 mph highway chase on public roads.
If they happened to shoot or run over your daughter -- a real possibility -- your attitude would change real quick.
Uhhhhh...no. Owning and and carrying guns is a RIGHT. One does NOT need government's permission - or need to carry insurance, etc. - in order to exercise a "right"...whereas driving a car is supposedly a "privilege".
Exactly where in the 2nd Amend did The Founders give the 'nod' to any of that? All four clearly infringe on the right to keep and bear. No amount of legal 'spin' (AKA "interpretation") invalidates the truth inherent in that statement.
#1 is THEE CLASSIC first move toward gun confiscation, #2 & #3 turn the RIGHT to keep and bear into a privilege, and #4 turns a basic principle of 'justice' on its head: namely that one cannot be held responsible for the act(s) of someone else.
As regards #4; 'may as well also decree that if someone's CAR is stolen and the thief kills somebody with it - that death is the car OWNER's fault...OR decree that if a slick LAWYER sets a criminal free and said criminal subsequently kills/injures/robs/rapes someone or commits some other offense - the LAWYER is responsible for THAT.
How 'bout the last one, Counselor? Do we have a "deal" there?
I thought not.
Last edited:
Pat
Supporter
[/QUOTE]I agree. Cars and guns are the same!
So:
1. All guns must be registered with the government. All sales must be reported to the government. Failure to do so, you go to jail.
2. To operate a gun, you must have a license. That means training and background checks and a medical and mental health exam.
3. To own guns, you have to have insurance.
4. If someone steals your guns or otherwise uses them improperly, you are liable for it.
Deal?[/QUOTE]
Thanks for making my point Mr. Young.
When I looked back to your posts after the NYC Jihadi terrorist murders on October 31 you made no mention to anything other than justification for earlier calling Keith an "a#$hole" and a suggestion that you "BOTH need to knock it off". (That apparently lasted for two days). After the July 2016 truck attack it was "But the reality is crazy guy + acting alone + self radicalization". (So far three men with Tunisian origins and an Albanian couple, all previously unknown to the French intelligence agencies, had been charged by the ministère public with "criminal conspiracy in relation to a terrorist enterprise" and "complicity in murder in relation to a terrorist enterprise". A sixth male suspect was later charged with conspiracy in relation to a terrorist enterprise).
It would appear your outrage is a bit selective and confuses root cause versus effect. We don't have a gun, pickup truck, knife, problem here, we have a homicide problem. Fact is, firearm homicides have generally declined since the 1990s despite the relaxing of gun laws. If stringent regulations were the answer Chicago would be the safest city in America.
Perhaps gun control ranting is at its root a politicization to put conservatives on the defensive about liberal failures, from schools that do not teach to police departments that do not police and criminal-justice systems that do not bring criminals and their gangs to justice or curb recidivism. We've obviously got a long way to go in extinguishing Jihadi terrorism.
A liberal professor, Adam Lambert, even went so far to say professor stated that it’s only “rational” to believe that “the GOP and NRA must, in fact, want mass shootings” because “it serves their interests.” Really????
It's been posted here ad nauseam that the great majority our “gun death” incidents are not conventional crimes but intentionally self-inflicted wounds: private despair, not blood in the streets. Among non-fatal gunshot injuries, about one-third are accidents.
So if one is truly interested in a reduction in violence and crime, then logic demands that our efforts be focused on those that commit the crimes and why. Until we examine the mental health, justice, social welfare, immigration and education systems seem to be failing so badly, papering over the problem with gun, knife, van, auto regulations may feel good but they solve nothing. Too many people will simply die another way.
But then maybe all the ranting is just a snarky way to try to lather up some folks in the "despicable" category. As the Shadow says, "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?" If so, I'd like to quote former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
"What difference, at this point, does it make?"
So:
1. All guns must be registered with the government. All sales must be reported to the government. Failure to do so, you go to jail.
2. To operate a gun, you must have a license. That means training and background checks and a medical and mental health exam.
3. To own guns, you have to have insurance.
4. If someone steals your guns or otherwise uses them improperly, you are liable for it.
Deal?[/QUOTE]
Thanks for making my point Mr. Young.
When I looked back to your posts after the NYC Jihadi terrorist murders on October 31 you made no mention to anything other than justification for earlier calling Keith an "a#$hole" and a suggestion that you "BOTH need to knock it off". (That apparently lasted for two days). After the July 2016 truck attack it was "But the reality is crazy guy + acting alone + self radicalization". (So far three men with Tunisian origins and an Albanian couple, all previously unknown to the French intelligence agencies, had been charged by the ministère public with "criminal conspiracy in relation to a terrorist enterprise" and "complicity in murder in relation to a terrorist enterprise". A sixth male suspect was later charged with conspiracy in relation to a terrorist enterprise).
It would appear your outrage is a bit selective and confuses root cause versus effect. We don't have a gun, pickup truck, knife, problem here, we have a homicide problem. Fact is, firearm homicides have generally declined since the 1990s despite the relaxing of gun laws. If stringent regulations were the answer Chicago would be the safest city in America.
Perhaps gun control ranting is at its root a politicization to put conservatives on the defensive about liberal failures, from schools that do not teach to police departments that do not police and criminal-justice systems that do not bring criminals and their gangs to justice or curb recidivism. We've obviously got a long way to go in extinguishing Jihadi terrorism.
A liberal professor, Adam Lambert, even went so far to say professor stated that it’s only “rational” to believe that “the GOP and NRA must, in fact, want mass shootings” because “it serves their interests.” Really????
It's been posted here ad nauseam that the great majority our “gun death” incidents are not conventional crimes but intentionally self-inflicted wounds: private despair, not blood in the streets. Among non-fatal gunshot injuries, about one-third are accidents.
So if one is truly interested in a reduction in violence and crime, then logic demands that our efforts be focused on those that commit the crimes and why. Until we examine the mental health, justice, social welfare, immigration and education systems seem to be failing so badly, papering over the problem with gun, knife, van, auto regulations may feel good but they solve nothing. Too many people will simply die another way.
But then maybe all the ranting is just a snarky way to try to lather up some folks in the "despicable" category. As the Shadow says, "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?" If so, I'd like to quote former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
"What difference, at this point, does it make?"
- Status
