And the shootings go on and on , and on, and on...

rgp said:
The mind set towards guns is not the problem. The mind set towards killing people with them is the problem.

Hence guns are not the problem.....people are.
Click to expand...
As long as you keep believing that, the shootings will go on and on and on and on.
The guns are a mean to an end.
They are the modus operandi.
 

StarSong said:
Not all people who kill others with guns could be classified as mentally unstable. With notable exceptions, most perpetrators' acquaintances say, "This is shocking! I never would have thought he'd do this - he was a nice neighbor, a bit quiet, but never caused any trouble."

People snap or plan these deeds without much warning. It's beyond me why we continue to allow folks to be armed with military-style weapons KNOWING that this has happened repeatedly and will continue to happen.

Addressing global warming and the need to stem America's gun violence have caught the attention of Millennials (as well as many in other generations) and are apt to be focal points of the 2020 local, state and federal elections.
Click to expand...



"It's beyond me why we continue to allow folks to be armed with military-style weapons KNOWING that this has happened repeatedly and will continue to happen. "

So then we should stop certain types of car sales, because they are known to have been used irresponsibly ?

Global warming [what ever that is] has nothing to do with this topic.
 

Aunt Bea said:
I think that the hardening of soft targets like shopping malls, schools, etc... provides some peace of mind to people and creates the illusion of safety but the bad guy will always have the ability to pick the time and the place. I don't see a way to get around that element of surprise other than teaching people how to act/react, evaluate situations, be aware of their surroundings, etc...
Click to expand...
Has it gotten to that point already? Duck and cover when the atomic bomb was a threat?Remember.
The solution was to ban atomic bombs. It's a tough call but someone has to do it.
 
Camper6 said:
This gun suit is all about how they advertise the gun. Remington is bankrupt.
Click to expand...


Don't know where you live ? But around here gun adverts are almost never heard. Henry rifles does do a sales pitch near Christmas. That's it. The suits are about stopping the sale of the guns.
 
rgp said:
"It's beyond me why we continue to allow folks to be armed with military-style weapons KNOWING that this has happened repeatedly and will continue to happen. "

So then we should stop certain types of car sales, because they are known to have been used irresponsibly ?

Global warming [what ever that is] has nothing to do with this topic.
Click to expand...
Well no. Because one has nothing to do with the other. It's false logic. If you ban car sales it will not influence deaths by guns and vice versa.
Cars were not designed to kill people and safety factors have been built in since they were invented.
On the other hand guns have been improved to enable the guns to kill more people in as short a time as possible.
I'm surprised you can't see what is happening.
 
rgp said:
Don't know where you live ? But around here gun adverts are almost never heard. Henry rifles does do a sales pitch near Christmas. That's it. The suits are about stopping the sale of the guns.
Click to expand...
Then you need to read about the case and what the survivors of Newton are suing about.
The NRA and some of the Republicans in Congress are trying to stop the suit.
They are backing Remington and in my opinion they have no business in trying to circumvent the courts.
It's actually no different then when people were suing the tobacco companies.
 
Sunny said:
The variable is easy access to guns. That's the only variable that makes sense.
Click to expand...

Not really. I expect that if you looked at countries with universal health care you would also find that they have much less gun violence than we do. I would not be surprised if the correlation was even stronger.
 
Camper6 said:
Has it gotten to that point already? Duck and cover when the atomic bomb was a threat?Remember.
The solution was to ban atomic bombs. It's a tough call but someone has to do it.
Click to expand...
I wondered when you would get around to me. :rolleyes:

The world is full of atomic bombs.

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat
I will always believe that the focus should be on identifying the criminal in order to prevent these types of crimes and that our best defense against them is learning how to protect ourselves as best we can in any situation. In my mind, it is no different than learning how to protect ourselves against the impact of fires, floods, hurricanes, etc...

If for some reason guns are ever banned the people intent on committing murder and mayhem will hijack a plane, blow up a truck filled with fertilizer, drive a truck through a crowded public place, etc...

We all have a responsibility to learn and teach the people we love to use our wits and be survivors in life.
 
Aunt Bea said:
I wondered when you would get around to me. :rolleyes:

The world is full of atomic bombs.

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat
I will always believe that the focus should be on identifying the criminal in order to prevent these types of crimes and that our best defense against them is learning how to protect ourselves as best we can in any situation. In my mind, it is no different than learning how to protect ourselves against the impact of fires, floods, hurricanes, etc...

If for some reason guns are ever banned the people intent on committing murder and mayhem will hijack a plane, blow up a truck filled with fertilizer, drive a truck through a crowded public place, etc...

We all have a responsibility to learn and teach the people we love to use our wits and be survivors in life.
Click to expand...
I don't think you have an idea what we are up against with the gun lobbyists.
They do not want any restrictions whatsoever so how can you "identify the criminal" before the fact.
Their solution is to arm people but that's an after the fact solution.
What I would be looking for is prevention.
If you want to read what I am talking about look up the shooting in Sutherland Hills church.
That to me was the most heinous crime I could ever imagine.
The shooter went through the church shooting crying babies execution style.
It was so bad that the tape recording of the shooting which was recorded by the church for later transmission has never been released.
If Sutherland Hills has never changed anyone's mind then there is plainly no hope.

And an NRA instructor after he was exiting the church and shot the guy but it was too late. He got away and then committed suicide.
 
Camper6 said:
Well no. Because one has nothing to do with the other. It's false logic. If you ban car sales it will not influence deaths by guns and vice versa.
Cars were not designed to kill people and safety factors have been built in since they were invented.
On the other hand guns have been improved to enable the guns to kill more people in as short a time as possible.
I'm surprised you can't see what is happening.
Click to expand...


I never said car sales had anything to do with gun deaths.......But the car is an inanimate object that is used to kill sometimes. Should we ban it ?

I can see what is happening, half crazed / fully crazy people are killing for no reason. At the very least no reason that the rest of us can grasp.

Guns are improved to give the gun holder [soldier] the advantage in a war situation......Do we not want that for our soldiers?
 
Last edited:
Camper6 said:
I don't think you have an idea what we are up against with the gun lobbyists.
They do not want any restrictions whatsoever so how can you "identify the criminal" before the fact.
Their solution is to arm people but that's an after the fact solution.
What I would be looking for is prevention.
If you want to read what I am talking about look up the shooting in Sutherland Hills church.
That to me was the most heinous crime I could ever imagine.
The shooter went through the church shooting crying babies execution style.
It was so bad that the tape recording of the shooting which was recorded by the church for later transmission has never been released.
If Sutherland Hills has never changed anyone's mind then there is plainly no hope.

And an NRA instructor after he was exiting the church and shot the guy but it was too late. He got away and then committed suicide.
Click to expand...
You do tend to jump around like a flea on a hot stove. :)

I think I have a pretty good understanding of the issue.

The only weapon I have is casting my vote for the people that represent my feelings on the issue.
 
Camper6 said:
This case is all about how they advertised their product.

Remember the tobacco advertising?

Why do you introduce irrelevant topics that have nothing to do with current events?

How can you do anything? It's up to the courts to decide.
Click to expand...

Not even close. Tobacco is harmful without being misused.
 
Camper6 said:
Then you need to read about the case and what the survivors of Newton are suing about.
The NRA and some of the Republicans in Congress are trying to stop the suit.
They are backing Remington and in my opinion they have no business in trying to circumvent the courts.
It's actually no different then when people were suing the tobacco companies.
Click to expand...

IMO the Newtown folks are doing as so many do. They are just turning their kids into cash-cows. Remington has deep pockets.

Backing/supporting the company is not circumventing the courts, it is just backing the appeal.

Huge difference comparing to tobacco. Tobacco advertised in a very attractive manner , in/on just about every form of media, TV, radio, billboards, etc.

Like I said, don't know where you live ? but here for guns , [almost] never seen.
 
Last edited:
rgp said:
I never said car sales had anything to do with gun deaths.......But the car is an inanimate object that is used to kill sometimes. Should we ban it ?

I can see what is happening, half crazed / fully crazy people are killing for no reason. At the very least no reason that the rest of us can grasp.

Guns are improved to give the gun holder [soldier] the advantage in a war situation......Do we not want that for our soldiers?
Click to expand...
Of course. That's where guns were designed for and where they belong. Not in the hands of civilians. Fully crazed people? Why are you arming them?
Should you ban cars? I have already pointed out that they don't influence gun deaths . Should we ban guns for the same reasons. You made the point about cars so yes you are comparing.
 
rgp said:
IMO the Newtown folks are doing as so many do. They are just turning their kids into cash-cows. Remington has deep pockets.

Backing/supporting the company is not circumventing the courts, it is just backing the appeal.

Huge difference comparing to tobacco. Tobacco advertised in a very attractive manner , in/on just about every form of media, TV, radio, billboards, etc.

Like I said, don't know where you live ? but here for guns , [almost] never seen.
Click to expand...
Remington has declared bankruptcy. Supporting the company shows where the loyalty lies. Tobacco is no longer advertised on t.v. It has been banned on television and radio. Gun advertising? Online.
 
Last edited:
Black humor:

Yea, here in Texas when the lone gunman killed five cops last winter (was it two winter’s ago?) in downtown Dallas
Citizens gather close to the scene totaling long guns. It’s legal…
The cops were stressed; mad, darn lucky a shooting riot did not brake out.



New deer rifles, any long gun as well as pistols are exhibited to friends, neighbors so they can ‘Oooh and Ahhh’

There is a plant, 75 miles south of Amarillo, Tx. where A-bombs and the other toys
of our culture are assembled.

Longhorn Folkhorn says, “Guns are piker’s, if you want’a see the real thing go to Amarillo, rub up against them A-bombs and other toys we got. That ought’s grease your
bacon. Listen son, now listen, I’m a talking, maybe you can slip a guard a few bucks
and get one them A-bombs that’s old, or needs repair…their gonn’a chunk it out anyway
‘cause it’s obsolete.
Don’t get one’a them suitcase A-bombs, the bigger the better.
Load it in your pickup, tote it home, store it in you garage, cover it with a tarp, make sure those radiation symbols are face up.
When one them fell’a comes over to show off his new gun, ask him do he want’a see a real whiz/bang gun; take him to your garage, jerk of the tarp.

“Clem that there little baby will kill all the deer in a couple hundred miles. I’m gonn’a take it to my deer lease and get me a bunch of deer.”

“Can I come?”
 
Camper6 said:
Of course. That's where guns were designed for and where they belong. Not in the hands of civilians. Fully crazed people? Why are you arming them?
Should you ban cars? I have already pointed out that they don't influence gun deaths . Should we ban guns for the same reasons. You made the point about cars so yes you are comparing.
Click to expand...


I'm comparing cars to cars , only . Cars kill people I never compared them to, or said they influenced gun deaths...

"Why are you arming them?"

Because the second amendment of the constitution says they have a right to have them.
 
Camper6 said:
Remington has declared bankruptcy. Supporting the company shows where the loyalty lies. Tobacco is no longer advertised on t.v. It has been banned on television and radio. Gun advertising? Online.
Click to expand...


OK, so they are loyal to / support the company that is not circumventing the courts. Yes tobacco was advertised for years.....the law suits took that away. But the right to have tobacco was never in the constitution .

"Gun advertising? Online.".........Online ? IMO one must "go-there" to see it. Not exactly in your face like tobacco was.
 
Trade said:
I don't think it's the guns at all. I think it's our culture and our economic system that by it's very nature leaves millions of people left out and marginalized. A certain small percentage of these are going to crack under the stress and act out.
Click to expand...

Being able to act out with guns seems pretty different than being able to act out without guns. The optionality presented with the former is a little distressing.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top