Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 179. (Read 450471 times)

Somewhere i read regarding number of people having guns in America and I found the amount of guns in america shocking, i think it needs to be reigned it because i have read about several high school massacres involving guns in america and we are yet to have one. its just my opinion but the rest of the world manage to 'protect their property' without such dangerous weapons.

Yep, cause the police have nothing better to do than respond to frivolous attempts to harass lawful gun owners.

These people are nutters.  I've read their facebook page.  Full on kookery, with none of them bothering to acknowledge that their actions are tantamount to pranking the police department and diverting officers from things they may be doing, with no benefit whatsoever to the safety of society, and may likely result in harm coming to someone that needs help because these tards have diverted cops so they can get a little giggle.

They should be prosecuted.  And like Rodeo, if one of these calls is made on me I will do whatever possible to do exactly that.

There will be pushback to this activity.  Seeing as these people cannot apparently see that the result of their activity is detrimental in the first place I have to wonder if they've bothered to consider that possibility.

Well let's say that humanity operated collectively, and it was about innovating technology to the point where we consume resources in a sustainable manner.  I'd say we have the technology live in a sustainable way (energy production and consumption, agriculture, transportation), however we are unable to execute on it.  We are putting a lot of effort and resource towards unsustainable resource consumption, which is negatively impacting the air we need to breathe and the water we need to drink.  When collective sustainability is sacrificed for personal ambition/desire/profit, it is similar to cancer in your body.  Not to say that personal ambition and desire is meaningless, but it can also be done in a way that positively or neutrally impacts the environment around us.

We have all you can eat buffet's here, but there are others dying from starvation.  The chemical soup of Coke and Pepsi are accessible world wide, but clean drinking water isn't.  We send raw materials to China to produce a product that you can use for 10 minutes before it ends up in a landfill, where it will not decompose.  I consider that a terrible allocation of resources.

Don't know? but if you have a lawyer I think anyone would win. It is illegal to file a false police report and slander to make a false accusation. I would not care, when the swat team got there they would be like "Oh hi Rich, how you been? You gona shoot with us this week at the club?".

How many victims of swatting have received similar luxurious compensation? 

I would love it if someone "swatted" me. It is illegal and they are going to face the music in court. But the reason I would hope to be swatted is profit. I would have a great civil suit and I doubt their lawyer would ever let it get to court. I would just drive by their house and pick out a car I want. Or better yet a cool boat, oh I hope they have a boat.
 

Which of course may lead to more stories like these: Man and officer wounded, dog killed in police address mix-up

Cops Who Flash Banged Infant’s Crib Are Blaming the Baby

With regard to https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12308818, gun control is about getting guns out of the hands of law enforcement. Click the picture.

New anti-gun strategy: “swatting” open carry permit holders


Here’s a new trend which can only end badly. Having lost one battle after another in the courts, anti-Second Amendment groups have begun pushing some “extra-legal” means to intimidate legal gun owners in the public square. Unfortunately, the method of choice is probably going to wind up getting somebody killed. You may be familiar with the term “SWATting” which rose to prominence when hackers began making phony calls to 9-1-1 claiming some sort of life threatening emergency at the homes of their targets (political or otherwise) in the hopes of sending armed officers to invade the home. That dangerous ploy obviously seems like a great idea to some prominent anti-gun groups and they are encouraging their supporters to do the same to people who are observed carrying in public. (Fox News)

As more states relax rules about open-carrying of guns, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence has taken to social media to urge the public to assume gun-toters are trouble, and to call the cops on anyone they feel may be a threat.

“If you see someone carrying a firearm in public—openly or concealed—and have ANY doubts about their intent, call 911 immediately and ask police to come to the scene,” the group wrote on its widely followed Facebook page. “Never put your safety, or the safety of your loved ones, at the mercy of weak gun laws that arm individuals in public with little or no criminal and/or mental health screening.”

That approach, according to a blog post by Ohio-based Buckeye Firearms Association, could give rise to needless, tense confrontations between police and gun owners. The association and other similar groups liken the tactic to “swatting,” or the act of tricking an emergency service into dispatching responders based on a false report.


While this is a bad idea (and a criminal one) under any circumstances, it’s a particularly cynical and hypocritical move on the part of the gun grabbers. They tend to be almost exclusively liberal and have a large crossover with the same groups who are constantly complaining about violent encounters between the police and suspects. The atmosphere around the nation is particularly tense for law enforcement officers as more and more of them are murdered and criminals become more brazen. Sending the cops out on a call where they have been falsely informed that someone is “acting suspicious” and is clearly armed just puts everyone on a hair trigger… literally.

Granted, in the vast majority of cases, a well trained gun owner is going to calmly respond to any police who approach him, not make any motions which look like they are going to draw their weapon and simply ask the officer what’s going on. At that point the police can ask about a permit (if in a state where one is required) and ascertain the situation. But there are always exceptions to the rule and if this goes wrong you could easily see a tragedy where there was no problem at all. And even if things work out in a completely peaceful fashion, you’ve just wasted the time of the cops who could have been out chasing down actual criminals. This is a disgusting tactic, and people found to be phoning in such bogus reports should be held accountable for abusing the emergency response system and put in jail. As the FBI notes, this has already happened.

Since we first warned about this phone hacking phenomenon in 2008, the FBI has arrested numerous individuals on federal charges stemming from swatting incidents, and some are currently in prison (see sidebar). Today, although most swatting cases are handled by local and state law enforcement agencies, the Bureau often provides resources and guidance in these investigations.

“The FBI looks at these crimes as a public safety issue,” said Kevin Kolbye, an assistant special agent in charge in our Dallas Division. “It’s only a matter of time before somebody gets seriously injured as a result of one of these incidents.”

Perhaps the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence and their related ilk should stick to more traditional methods of trying to undermine the Second Amendment. One of the most popular is trying to twist poll results to make people think that gun rights aren’t as popular and cherished by Americans as they actually are. (For a great example of this, see this Mark Berman explainer in the WaPo.) It’s dishonest as the day is long, but at least it’s not directly getting anyone killed.


http://hotair.com/archives/2015/09/02/new-anti-gun-strategy-swatting-open-carry-permit-holders/

Our allocation of resources is not terrible. It is the law of Evolution. Those wanting to put more chances to have their genes move along generations went near places with resources. Salt. Most big european cities started near a salt mine. We all know this is how the roman empire was paying his soldiers. We still use that word today, with the same latin root: salary.

That is why humans move around: more resources, a better place away from wars or be killed. Never the opposite (unless isis)

 

I would agree with you on both points.  Our allocation of resources is terrible; I don't think there's any questioning that.

So the issue with guns/war is that they already exist and are in the hands of millions of people.  Most of those people are responsible folks not looking to use guns offensively towards another person.  Some use it for defense, sport, hunting, protection from wild animals, etc.  The issue is the small % of mentally ill or violent people.  I would assume that most of them would acquire guns illegally from the black market, to the point that they bypass any safety training or testing that the rest have to go through.

If there is any possibility of acquiring a gun illegally, then the entire gun control conversation doesn't address the issue.  Right now I'd say it can be acquired without too much difficulty, and all you need is cash.

In my community guns are basically the equivalent of a crescent wrench.  Most people learn to handle them from family.  Often they are given as gifts, or loaned around if someone needs a particular variety that they don't own for some specific task.  This seems to work well here.  There are very few problems with guns themselves, and confrontational crime is very rare except in criminal enclaves.  Suicides do happen with guns sometimes of course, but there is little doubt in my mind that someone intent on suicide will fairly easily find alternates if a gun would have been their first choice.

In short, a lot of the restrictions which are being talked about would be somewhat onerous on us.  But it's also nothing we cannot deal with.  Probably by mostly ignoring the nonsense.  Fortunately our local law enforcement shares the sentiment of the community since they are a part of it.  So, all this bureaucratic red-tape and associated bullshit is a 'first world problems' so to speak.  Knock yourselves out.

Gun control need to happen. You can't give  any kind of gun to anyone, there need to be some sort requirements met if you want to buy a gun.
Idealistically it will be good idea that before receiving gun you had to complete some sort of course where you will learn how to handle it.

tl;dr Don't give guns to anyone

The world will be better place if there's no guns/wars. My point of view about guns/wars is this. We use natural resources wrong way.

Gonna have to ponder that one...

BLACK, GAY REPORTER MURDERS STRAIGHT, WHITE JOURNALISTS — MEDIA BLAME THE GUN


On Wednesday, America met a deeply evil human being: Vester Lee Flanagan II, also known as reporter Bryce Williams.

Williams murdered two people while they were live on air on WDBJ in Virginia: reporter Alison Parker, and cameraman Adam Ward. After the murders, he went on the run – and while he was on the run, he tweeted out his rationale for the killings, accusing Parker of making “racist comments” and Ward of going “to hr on me after working with me one time!!!” He then posted video to his Facebook and Twitter pages of himself shooting both at point-blank range.

Williams is black. Parker and Ward were white.

Williams is gay. Parker and Ward were straight.

None of which would be relevant, except that Williams specifically cited his identity as a factor in the killings. In a 23-page rambling letter sent to ABC News, Williams wrote that the Charleston church shooting in June should have provoked a race war: “Why did I do it? I put a deposit for a gun on 6/19/15. The Church shooting in Charleston happened on 6/17/15…What sent me over the top was the church shooting…You want a race war (deleted)? BRING IT THEN YOU WHITE …(deleted)!!!” According to ABC News, he claimed he had “suffered racial discrimination, sexual harassment and bullying at work,” that he had “been attacked by black men and white females,” and that he had been “attacked for being a gay, black man.”

Williams marinated in his self-appointed victimhood status. He filed a lawsuit against his Tallahassee, Florida employer, WTWC – a lawsuit settled out of court. He filed a complaint with the with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against WDBJ after his firing – a complaint the EEOC dismissed. According to WDBJ station manager Jeff Marks, Williams was “an unhappy man” with a “reputation as someone who had been difficult to work with… looking out for people to say things that he could take offense to.”

Had a white straight man killed a black gay man, released first-person tape of the shooting, and then unleashed a manifesto about being victimized by affirmative action and anti-religious bigotry from homosexuals, the media would never stop covering the story. They’d be eager to report that shooter’s motives with all the attendant politically correct hullaballoo about the racism and homophobia of the United States more broadly. We would hear about white supremacy (reprehensible Black Lives Matter leader Deray McKesson actually jumped the gun, thinking the shooter was white, and tweeted, “Whiteness will explain away nearly anything”).

We would hear excoriations of the Republican presidential candidates for their failures to stand with the Black Lives Matter movement–and their opposition to same-sex marriage. In similar circumstances, the entire political and media establishment determined that the Confederate flag was somehow to blame for Dylan Storm Roof’s brutal slaying of nine people at a historically black church; just last week, the media tried to blame Donald Trump’s anti-immigration stance for two thugs beating up a Hispanic homeless man in Boston.

But Bryce Williams’ self-described victim status, even while murdering innocents, will merit no rethinking of the divisive politics in which he apparently bathed. We won’t have a conversation about whether pushing a perennial picture of victimhood for blacks and gays in the most black-friendly, gay-friendly country on the planet could drive supposed victims to violence. We won’t talk about whether the Democratic Party’s takeover by the Black Lives Matter crew has encouraged some people to believe that only black lives matter, since only black lives are in danger – and even then, only some black lives matter, namely those killed by white people. Instead, we will be assured that Bryce Williams is an outlier by the same people who blamed Sarah Palin for Jared Lee Loughner shooting Gabrielle Giffords.

It is true that statistical outliers should not be used to club entire movements into submission. But leftists protesting at the linkage between Williams and their favored political causes have no ground on which to stand – they consistently blame conservatives for outlier events with no statistical basis. Moreover, Williams’ violence is part of a larger trend, not of black men killing white people (that still happens disproportionately, but the numbers are down), but of black men using supposed American racism as a rationale for violence more generally, and of gay people using supposed American homophobia as a rationale for violation of others’ rights.

Some in the media are actually going beyond delinking Williams from his politics – they’re defending Williams’ perverse worldview, questioning whether evil, racist, homophobic America created him. Columnist WonderWomanist at Gawker wrote, “I can understand him being frustrated with racial discrimination at his job but it was not worth throwing his life over… RIP to the victims even though they may have been racist.”

Kay Steiger at ThinkProgress took Williams’ self-serving narrative at face value: “One part of the document included the phrase ‘Suicide Note for Friends and Family’ and detailed discrimination he experienced as a gay, black man.”

But most of the the media will swivel to gun control, following the lead of the White House and Hillary Clinton, both of whom called for heavier gun control laws – even as both push for the release of criminals from prisons, a crackdown on law enforcement, and a racially divisive narrative of the country pitting black against white, all for political gain.

All of these policies will do nothing to stop Bryce Williamses — in fact, they will make Bryce Williamses more common. Teaching Americans that they aren’t victims would be a great way of battling evil – most victims aren’t evil, but virtually all evil people think they are victims, and thus justify their violence. But teaching Americans that they aren’t victims would undercut the Democratic message that all minorities are victims, and thus require bigger government. And that message, and its attendant political success, must take precedence over the building of a more inclusive, more understanding country.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/26/black-gay-reporter-murders-straight-white-journalists-media-blame-the-gun/

I believe for US there's a historical reason to keep a population with guns; the WW 1 telegram where Germany offered support for Mexico to invade the US in an attempt to divert US away of coming to Europe. The fact that most of Americans had guns worked as a "no way, thanks" from the Mexicans.

One of my all-time favorites.  Apologies if it's been posted here before.

Just curious. When you are stopped from owning a gun (except if you work in security), how do they stop you?

Do they stop you with swords?
Do they stop you with knives?
Do they stop you with clubs?
Baseball bats?
Poison your food?
Are they karate and kung fu experts?
Do they overwhelm you with superior numbers, even though many of them die?
Do they stop you by running you down with a car?
Do they simply stare you down?

Perhaps you and everybody else are so obedient to law that you simply obey their declaration of the law that nobody (except if you work in security) gets to have a gun.

I'd really like to know.

Is it that they are organized and nobody else knows how to organize?

Do they use guns to stop you? If so, why can't you just use guns to stop them?