Media ******** about gun control,and truth

[misiek93]

Maybe it's less the meds themselves and more the general instability of those prescribed the meds?

Agree 100% there is no question those were ustable individuals. My wife is an elementary teacher and she has seen "few" kids that you can tell something is not all quite right in the head but it practically takes an act of congress to have something done about it. god forbid she suggests a kid for evaluation and a parent takes issue with that, the shitstorm that would come down on my wife would be unreal. Same thing goes for ER nurses, they see this all the time but have no choice but to release those people from their hospital and there is absolutely nothing they can do to stop them.

 

[85 MAX-fan]

A hypothetical gang situation that seems to suggest I should leave my firearms hanging on my front door so they can have easier access to them isn't related to Sandy Hook. Safe storage doesn't have to mean it takes especially long to get access to. Also the gun in my hand wouldn't even change the outcome in that situation one bit.
Wrong a gun in your hand could stop it. A gun in a safe would NOT. Just what type of storage are you suggesting?
I'm not a Hollywood marksman and I'm not about to ace head shot the guy holding the knife and then do some slow motion dive to cover my child while shooting everybody else in the room simultaneously. You've argued that more rounds are necessary for adequate defense because people can't shoot well in that sort of situation, but also seem to think single-handed take-down of a group of thugs and rescuing a hostage wouldn't be a problem? Give them what they came for and hope they leave in peace and then report the crime.

The point Zack, is that again you are blaming the victim of a murder for the acts of a murderer. You have no idea how the guns were stored or how they were obtained, but again you want to pass legislation that would not have done anything to stop the school shooting because it makes you FEEL GOOD.

We DO know the owner of the guns was Murdered when they were STOLEN. Do you really feel this additional regulation would have stopped that? A safe will not necesarily stop criminals from taking a gun. He simply could have put a knife to his mothers throat and forced her to get them. He was more than willing to kill her.

The bulk of this is enforcing and uniforming laws already in place. The only changes and new stuff look to be proposals to congress where it can be revised and hashed out there as a good or bad idea.

I haven't seen all 23 points yet, but honestly so far the only things I take issue with are up to congress to reject or revise to something suitable. I'm especially happy to see the various research bits. It's time to get smarter about these laws and how to better prevent these incidents, and that's a great start.

Smarter? This will prevent nothing.

:edit:
Ted Bundy is a poor example. He lured his victims in. Not everybody will be armed at all times so he would have lured others or found another way to get the weapon away.

Wrong Zack, the answer is that he Bludgeoned his victims to death. At least thirty of them. He wanted to kill, gun or no gun. He liked it. You think Ted Bundy was unstoppable, but the Sandy Hook killer was?? Where's the logic here Zack?

And Again, How would any of the 23 points have stopped Sandy Hook? You still haven't answered that.

 

[poppop]

Yea and all the law obidening thieves crackheads thugs ect will surely obey.Lay downyour guns bad guy or turn them in obama has spoken.Start wars all across the globe.lunitac population on the rise here, and we need to turn in our guns.I know let's do what the goverment does to pakastain lets send em money,The taxpayers money,They have nucelar warheads let's pay them not to kill people.Mexico !no guns allowed,Don't worry here comes operation fast and furious.With thousands of guns,Provided by our great uncle sam!And again provided and payed for by the taxpayers of amercia,And delivered to the drug cartels!YEA!!!!That way they can kill our boader patrol!More drugs To drive the insane craizer! What the illegal drugs dont get the preciption drugs Should Take care of,.And the goverment can make even more stringent laws to make us even safer.Does no one see?

 

[ZackDaniels]

Wrong Zack, the answer is that he Bludgeoned his victims to death. At least thirty of them. He wanted to kill, gun or no gun. He liked it. You think Ted Bundy was unstoppable, but the Sandy Hook killer was?? Where's the logic here Zack?

And Again, How would any of the 23 points have stopped Sandy Hook? You still haven't answered that.

All I've said I support are the resources being granted for researching root cause and effectiveness of laws on the books, the laws on the books being uniformly applied, and efforts towards better enforcement (with the exception of simply making harsher penalties as I don't feel they're an effective deterrent). If these laws are already perfectly uniform across the states, as you seem to be saying... what exactly are we arguing about?

We have to learn more about why these events happen in order to take effective action against them. Since there seems to be little unbiased research in this area... again why is this something to oppose? Both sides of this, pro and con, need good information to base their positions on. Otherwise it's guess and guess/gut against gut, and the only way we find out what works is by examining if more or less people die. Hardly ideal.

Requiring training or storage isn't part of this. Though I would support that because as you have said, they're very easy to use. I think that makes them easy to misuse with tragic results. I fear somebody with no respect for their weapon firing a gun in a backyard with my kid present more than I fear some gang takeover or serial killer coming across my family's path. Though, I'm happy to concede this to you. I don't know for sure either way, and again... part of why more research into these events is something I happily support. So that we can have more to go on than "yes it would/no it wouldn't", hypothetical gang hostage situations, and Ted Bundy.

I haven't blamed anybody for anything.

What would you suggest get done to prevent this sort of incident in the future? "Nothing can be done" is not an acceptable answer at all. If we don't have the info now to make that kind of decision. Then at the very least research should be done to try and get it. That appears to be getting done, and I'm very pleased about that. Maybe it will turn up something and maybe it won't, and that is the very nature of research. It's no reason not to try.

 

[poppop]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HbvAMFL-2QEveryone talks about the mouse in the room while totally ingoranting the elephant.Ah hell,The object is about giving a dam right?It all boils down to more money and control for the goverment.Arguing amonst ourselfs is a waste.Please wake up!We damn sure have some smart guys.You all do some great research.Just listen to the video,And see who the real enemeny is.We are all intitled to our opinions

 

[SpecOps13]

This!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:bang head:

 

[srk468]

Or maybe guns with barrels bent 180 degrees. That would surely cut down on gun usage.
Dave

Dude I've seen enough of your posts including this one to know your a tool, please go play in traffic... Zack, the definition or "arms" hasn't changed since the constitution was written.. Private citizens owned cannons during the revolutionary war, I don't know many legal gun owners that secretly want to buy a Howitzer... The agreed definition that most pro second amendment people I know is to have access to the same weapons as an average infantryman... In this regard we are already being heavily infringed upon and to be honest I don't have a super huge problem with the way things are now minus the Hughes amendment in 1986..

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

[98Redlne]

Zack, the definition or "arms" hasn't changed since the constitution was written.. Private citizens owned cannons during the revolutionary war, I don't know many legal gun owners that secretly want to buy a Howitzer... The agreed definition that most pro second amendment people I know is to have access to the same weapons as an average infantryman... In this regard we are already being heavily infringed upon and to be honest I don't have a super huge problem with the way things are now minus the Hughes amendment in 1986..

^^^^This

The concept of the Second Amendment was exactly as srk stated it. The citizens of the country were to have access to the same infantry type weapons as the standing army. In colonial days, that was the musket. In WWII, it would have been the M1 Garand, 30 carbine, and Tommy Gun. Today it is the M16/AR15.

Could the founding fathers have envisioned the evolution of the gun into what it is today....you bet your a$$ they did. I am sure they had no idea of exactly what shape the weapons would have, however they fully understood that weapons would evolve and the need for the civilian population to posses whatever weapons the standing army did.

If the civilian population is armed then the government exists so long as the population allows it to exist. Should the time come when the population no longer supports the operation of the government, they have both the constitutional authority and the ability to remove that government from power.

Any firearms regulation that removes the citizens right to own the main battle weapon of the standing army infringes on the second amendment and should be immediately deemed unconstitutional. I contend that a government that attempts to impose firearm restrictions (infringements) has stepped dangerously close to the line where the citizens have a duty to remove it. No free citizen should consider for one second accepting firearms registration, limitation, banning or confiscation in any shape or form.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

I fail to see how there can be any ambiguity in the meaning of the text.

 

[ZackDaniels]

Zack, the definition or "arms" hasn't changed since the constitution was written.. Private citizens owned cannons during the revolutionary war, I don't know many legal gun owners that secretly want to buy a Howitzer... The agreed definition that most pro second amendment people I know is to have access to the same weapons as an average infantryman... In this regard we are already being heavily infringed upon and to be honest I don't have a super huge problem with the way things are now minus the Hughes amendment in 1986..

Thanks for the clarification on that. I guess there needs to be some conversations regarding if having full military grade infantry class weapons does more harm than good. Being realistic, I do worry more about them falling into irresponsible hands than the need for a militia to step up to things needing done. Maybe some kind of training should be required for making the full range legal to own? I just can't get right with the idea that an assault weapon's only requirement to own is passing a background check and having the money to buy it. Seems there is just too much room for irresponsible usage and accidental harm as a result.


Anyway, here's the full 23 orders from Obama.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...-on-gun-safety-signed-today-by-the-president/

1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.

3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.

4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.

6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.

7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).

9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make itwidely available to law enforcement.

11. Nominate an ATF director.

12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.

13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.

14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.

15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effectiveuse of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to developinnovative technologies.

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.

20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.

21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.

22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

The 2 in bold (4, and 16) are the ones I have any concern with. The rest just look like getting better data for checks we already have, and enforcing laws we already have. I'm not sure why we need a federal executive action to worry about dr's ability to ask their patients about guns? Doesn't really seem to matter much, but just interesting that it's in there.

I really don't like the classification of a dangerous person. I wonder what those classifications looked like and who decides them? What formal and consistent rules are applied to said classification? Not a big fan at all of mental health being used like this... far too much room for error.

That's the entirety of it aside from the proposals to congress for the clip/assault weapons stuff. None of these look to be directly related to guns at all, just getting better info for things going forward. Overall, I like it. More funding for schools for training, better data on existing procedures, and funding for research to get some good conclusions out of the better data. Seems that the Biden task force more or less concluded what I said a bit ago, we don't really know for sure what might and might not work... best course of action right now is getting better information for more informed decisions.

 

[Rollie]

I would like to suggest a petition to the White House to not pursue any " Victum Disarmament Program " until the " Fast & Furious " & " Bengazi " scandals have been thoroughly investigated and the guilty , treasonous parties have been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[dannymax]

Banning assault weapons will sure be a boon for one industry....smuggling and blackmarket....they can start hiring any day now cause business is about to pick up!

There is no way in hell to keep assault weapons out of the hands of criminals....it just ain't gonna happen!

 

[Itgoes]

For everyone that claims the new gun law proposals are because of Obama being in the White House.....the last 3 REPUBLICAN Presidents were in favor of an assault weapons ban.

With Obama in office there has been a least 1 law passed that that I know of that has relaxed gun laws. No President would have sat back without some action after the massacre in New Town IMO.

 

[srk468]

Thanks for the clarification on that. I guess there needs to be some conversations regarding if having full military grade infantry class weapons does more harm than good. Being realistic, I do worry more about them falling into irresponsible hands than the need for a militia to step up to things needing done. Maybe some kind of training should be required for making the full range legal to own? I just can't get right with the idea that an assault weapon's only requirement to own is passing a background check and having the money to buy it. Seems there is just too much room for irresponsible usage and accidental harm as a result..

You also must submit to random ATF inspections to make sure the weapons are secure, I don't have a problem with a training stipulation either it just has to be "attainable" for the average person (think like CCW training class) if they want it but they are more dangerous so I can see the need for the regulation mentioned above for fully automatic weapons... The semi-automatic is just fine the way it sits, look at the video's I posted earlier and you'll clearly see most people are being misled to think there are full auto machine guns out there and that's why they are for the ban.. Semi-auto rifles are used so little in crime that it would be impossible to track any success of any ban on them because they aren't the problem anyways. As far as magazine capacity goes I've already listed perfectly good reasons to have them even though I don't have to, it is a constitutional freedom the federal government cannot take away...

 

[ZackDaniels]

Does the ATF have the legal authority to do random inspections like that? Looking at their YouTube channel... it appears as though they don't have much authority at all. Everything is disclaimered with statements like 'now you're not legally required to do this, but we recommend you do it.'

Please don't sell to people who are actively drunk when purchasing the weapon

Please conduct an inventory of your firearms store at least once a year

Please don't let people change their answer of the 'are you a convicted felon' question

:rofl_200:

I would like to suggest a petition to the White House to not pursue any " Victum Disarmament Program " until the " Fast & Furious " & " Bengazi " scandals have been thoroughly investigated and the guilty , treasonous parties have been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

I just listed everything the White House is doing. There's nothing there for disarmament. So... you can save yourself some time and just consider your petition signed, and granted. Nice work, that was an extremely fast and effective petition.

As to things the White House has proposed to congress, it's up to them now to see what gets done (if anything). Petition your congressmen if you want to do something about it that has a chance at changing anything.

 

[Rollie]

[I just listed everything the White House is doing. There's nothing there for disarmament. So... you can save yourself some time and just consider your petition signed, and granted. Nice work, that was an extremely fast and effective petition.

Thank you Mr. Holder , I appreciate your prompt and honest assessment of the two biggest scandals this country has seen in the last 4 years of your marxist boss and head tyrant. Oh , I forgot to ask , which prison will you and your accomplices be attending for rehab. classes ?

 

[jfeagins]

With Obama in office there has been a least 1 law passed that that I know of that has relaxed gun laws. QUOTE]

Which one was that?:ummm:

 

[Itgoes]

With Obama in office there has been a least 1 law passed that that I know of that has relaxed gun laws. QUOTE]

Which one was that?:ummm:

View attachment 33594
View attachment 33593
View attachment 33595
View attachment 33596

Allowing guns in National Parks. Prior to 2010 they had to be stored and locked.

Not saying Obama was responsible for the change in the law, but he was in office and did sign it into law. He has not pushed for any gun control at all until the recent mass shootings.

 

[Traumahawk]

Here is a question that i have about Sandy Hook. Supposedly the coroner on scene stated initially that the gun shots appeared to be from rifles (and went on to state that he had been a coroner for X number of years, and knows what he is talking about). I also heard that when the shooter was taken into custody, the AR-15 (or multiples...I dont know) were actually locked in a trunk of a car...has anyone else heard this? So....if that is true...is this propaganda to go after "assualt weapons"?

Eric

 

[Redbone]

Allowing guns in National Parks. Prior to 2010 they had to be stored and locked.

Not saying Obama was responsible for the change in the law, but he was in office and did sign it into law. He has not pushed for any gun control at all until the recent mass shootings.

AND conveinently enough just after BO's election victory. I wonder if this is just the tip of the iceberg as far as his "change" promise goes?

 

[mr.maxx]

Here is a question that i have about Sandy Hook. Supposedly the coroner on scene stated initially that the gun shots appeared to be from rifles (and went on to state that he had been a coroner for X number of years, and knows what he is talking about). I also heard that when the shooter was taken into custody, the AR-15 (or multiples...I dont know) were actually locked in a trunk of a car...has anyone else heard this? So....if that is true...is this propaganda to go after "assualt weapons"?

Eric

i read recently that only handguns were found in the school. go figure.