PDA

View Full Version : CNN has an article with a request.


Ratboy
07-24-2012, 6:17 PM
They want to hear from gun owners. I've read a number of them and most are pretty good.

Here's a link to one of them: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-819622

IVC
07-24-2012, 6:33 PM
The article is factually incorrect. Heller settled that the 2A addresses a right that is not connected to the membership in a state militia and that it's an individual right.

These days we don't have to argue "militia" and "collective right" concepts since the court settled it. We can simply say "it doesn't work that way, go do your homework."

Ratboy
07-24-2012, 6:37 PM
True.

That may not have been the best one to have the link for but there are a few people speaking up. Some of them are off the mark, some are just posting bs to post but there are some good ones.

ASTMedic
07-24-2012, 6:40 PM
Had to post this one since I thought it was so good:

I am young. I have "hipster" friends. I have a graduate degree in Environmental History. I consider myself an academic in every sense of the word. I am a vegetarian. I believe in global warming. I am active, healthy, informed, and generally a paragon of the liberal arts educated, white, middleclass American.
With of these factors in mind, one might find my love of guns surprising. In fact, my wife and I currently own three: a .380 handgun designed specifically for carrying comfortably, a .40 handgun with 15rd ammo capacity, and a shotgun that, though sometimes used for skeet shooting, sits hidden in my bedroom loaded with police buckshot. I donít hunt, and doubt I have what it takes to kill an animal; especially since I am a vegetarian.
So why the heck does someone like me own a gun, have a concealed carry permit, and become extremely excited when President Obama allowed guns into Americaís National Parks? Why do I support a further loosening of gun controls; particularly with respect to where I can take a loaded firearm? Here are four reasons:
Reason 1: Reality - No matter how hard we try, people are fundamentally capable of very evil acts. Utopianism, in all its forms, has been the dream of many societies. It has never been achieved. Whether the threat is external, internal, or from my own tyrannical government, threats are real. Many people tend to dismiss the previous sentence as paranoia. However, such immediate dismissal speaks to broader social trends. Americans have a false sense of security. Yet, we are constantly reminded that earth is a fragile place. Global warming is exhibit A. To say that I should trust someone else to care for me in every eventuality is foolishness. Natural disasters, disease, social unrest, political tyranny, or a simple home invasion can all turn my safe little world upside down in a second. There is a reason why we have fire extinguishers and fire escape plans; disasters happen, more often than we would like to believe. Governments are there to pick up the pieces. When that moment comes, I cannot and should not assume that someone else can help me. Gunís empower the me to protect my family when appropriate. That moment could come at any time and in any place. To think otherwise is presumptuous. Whether itís a grizzly in Yellowstone or a nut in a movie theatre, I should be able to choose to defend myself, in the moment that I deem necessary.
Reason 2: History Ė Our foundersí inclusion of guns rights in the Constitution was historically unprecedented. It speaks to the society that the founders envisioned. Historically, every government that has trended toward centralization has tried to disarm its populous. Societies with the weakest and most decentralized forms of government always have almost universal ownership of weapons. The stronger a government gets, the more it seeks to dictate features of its society. Weapons, in all their historical forms, scream to be controlled. In a civilianís hands, they represent a severe check to the power. There was a reason that Southern slave owners were paranoid about weapons falling into the hands of their slaves. As soon as the oppressed obtain the means of resistance, external authority is totally undermined. The Arab Spring in Libya and Syria is case in point. We have cheered the use of weapons there. There are times when violence, like our own Revolution, brings about a social good. A study of history informed our founders that violence was a constant, and that a society where civilians take an interest in their own security is the noblest of all.
Reason 3: Fun Ė I understand that guns scare people. They can hurt. Kayaking scares me, as does mountain biking. I only do the latter, and then, only with extreme caution. However, just like rock climbing and football, guns are both dangerous and fun. They offer a challenge, a skill to be mastered, relaxation, water cooler discussion, bragging rights, and YouTube tutorials in the same way that power tools and Prada purses do. Like a chainsaw, they put the fun in functional. That has always been true. Usually, people who are afraid of guns change their minds once they learn to shoot them. I have plenty of anecdotal experience with that, though I cannot assume it is true for everyone.
Reason 4: Logical Legality Ė Theďwell regulatedĒ phrase, in the Second Amendment seems to indicate that government can impose some reasonable limits on weapons ownership. They have already done that in a sense. That we are not debating civilian ownership of anti-aircraft missile launchers is indicative of that. However, it is interesting to note that citizen militia groups, or more accurately artillery clubs, provided many of the early artillery units during the Civil War. Civilian ownership of heavy firepower is not unprecedented in our history. The right of Americans to bear arms is assured by the Constitution. This liberty is assured for a reason. Just saying that someone doesnít need an assault rifle doesnít make it true. There are other Constitutional rights that could be violated in the name of public safety. We could allow police to perform warrantless search and seizures on any suspect. We could allow police to arrest and indefinitely hold anyone they 'suspect' may be a threat to public safety. We could allow police to force confessions without a lawyer present or Miranda rights. Many of these are implied constitutional rights, and are not expressly found in the Bill of Rights. Imagine the crime and violence we could prevent if the police could do these things (the government IS constantly trying to gain these powers). Just think of the bad people we could remove from society! Yet, the fear of one injustice and the ďit could happen to meĒ factor cause us to accept that bad people will run free so that I can too. Sometimes you have to accept the riffraff so that individuals can enjoy liberty. Itís tough, but it is what makes us Americans.
A Final Case Study - Some argue that we simply need better licensing and controls on who gets a gun. The closest analogy to firearms, in terms of danger and desire for control, is automobile use. Americans have a system in place to license drivers. However, a driverís license does not prevent foolish behavior on the road. Likewise, there is nothing preventing someone without a license from getting into a car and driving. Perhaps the fear of punishment keeps some 15 year olds from doing that, but some still do. Laws just are not a deterrent for crazy. You can license, regulate, and register all you want, but it will never stop crazy. We want broad freedom for driving, and yet, the right to transport oneís self is not even in the Constitution!
In closing, it is important to note that we live in a very strange time in history. It is not that we are less violent; the last century proved that. It is that we have tried to avoid seeing violence and suffering. People die every day, but we avoid seeing it in person. We put our elders in nursing homes, we allow the slaughter houses to butcher our meat, and pay others to fight our wars while refusing to form the citizen armies as our founders leaned toward. However, we still like to see violence when it conforms to our tastes. We get our fix in video games and movies, but we arenít actually loosing anything important when people die there. There are no risks involved, so we get the sensation of violence, without consequence. I say this only to point out that those who argue that our society is gradually trending toward a violence free world is ridiculous. We have simply moved some things around to isolate ourselves from the harsh realities humans have faced for millennia, and many people still face today. Those that believe that we can eventually move to a new and better world free from violence, death, and human suffering discount history, human nature, and just plain crazy. Letís face it, America is great because we have taken calculated risks in allowing each other the right to choose our own destinies. This system, strikes a balance between anarchy and tyranny. Incidentally, the only constitutional right that protects the individual from both extremes, can be found in the Second Amendment.

mikaarce
07-24-2012, 6:47 PM
Nice reading!

Mendo223
07-24-2012, 7:05 PM
i want to write something myself that appeals to the younger hipster urban crowd....in a very factual basis that relies on certain points.

1. the numbers dont lie, for every homicide committed by a firearm in the US, 100 gun owners use their firearms for self defense. Compared to the 1 million+ defensive gun uses in our country, the 10k gun deaths pale in comparisson.

2. many politicians and celebrities have called for an assault weapon ban. they should know the facts before they speak. assault weapons are ALREADY banned, and the ar15 used in aurora was a semi auto (that jammed). ar15s and gun homicides by long rifles only represent a small portion of total gun homicides. the FBI reported 350 rifle deaths out of 9k gun deaths in 2010. Most massacres like ft.hood, vatech, and gabby giffords were committed by your standard semi automatic handgun.

3. Gun control effectively created a situation in that aurora movie theatre, where james holmes was garunteed to have 200+ defenseless, unarmed victims to shoot. it took police 90 seconds to respond, enough time for holmes to commit murder unabated. it truely illustrates the saying "when seconds count, police are minutes away"...are you going to risk your life on the police saving you? or would you like to have the chance to defend yourself? just one person with a license to carry might have saved several lifes. gun control people will argue "no one would have been able to make a clear shot in a dark audience, strays would have hit people"...to this i argue " people who carry concealed are required to pass special training and the scrutiny of their local sheriff, CCW carriers would have been able to make a calculated shot, and even if a stray hit an innocent person, the overall gun deaths would have been less" and to this i add, would you rather have 200 defenseless people with zero chance of defending themselves, or just 1 or 2 people who might have had a percentage chance of saving lives. to say that CCW holders would just kill more people is utter ignorance and basically says you do not wish to have any chance of saving your life or the lives of others.

4. even if every single gun purchase in the US was banned, and the police went door to door confiscating every gun they could, this would not stop gun violence in the US. the war on drugs and other forms of prohibition show that laws do not stop people from breaking them. a total gun ban would create a lucrative black market industry to supply illegal guns to criminals (one that already exists in america). criminals will obtain guns, people will risk time in prison to make profits selling illegal guns. total gun confiscation would basically garuntee that only two classes of people have firearms, police and criminals. This would effectively neuter the american publics ability to overthrow a government of tyrannic nature. Case in point, Myanmar, Syria, Communist China under Mao, where the government gunned down protesters and they were unable to do anything back. This would also create a situation like in Mexico, where cartel members are able to instill fear in an unarmed populace and kill with impunity. There are already 250 million privately owned firearms in america, it would be impossible to confiscate every one and it would be a gross misuse of tax payer money to implement this. This would also create extreme friction between the government and its people, especially the majority of americans who live in pro-gun states.

5. Time and time again, it has been shown that major urban cities that implement strict gun control have the highest rates of illegal gun violence. (Chicago, Oakland, Wash DC, San Francisco) when concealed carry permits go up, crime goes down. when the public is stripped of their right to concealed carry, crime goes up. Criminals actively support gun control because it guarantees their victims will be unarmed.

paused to maybe add more later...and fill in a few sections.

ASTMedic
07-24-2012, 7:14 PM
^ very nice

IVC
07-24-2012, 8:08 PM
I donít hunt, and doubt I have what it takes to kill an animal; especially since I am a vegetarian.

Vegetarians kill more animals than the non-vegetarians. It's just that you kill them by proxy and they are not the kind of animals that you feel sorry for. Insects, rodents and ungulates love to share your food, but you have to either kill them directly or take over their habitat and push them into starvation.

To be an academic, you need to accept the unpleasant facts. Avoidance of "icky" details of the real life by the urbanites is what brought us all the gun control.

nicki
07-24-2012, 8:40 PM
He actaully is focusing on something that there has been little discussion on, our collective duty to maintain, train, and serve in the miltia.

We do have enemies amongst us and this would be a system that would improve national security at modest cost.

Yes we got Heller/MacDonald rulings that the second amendment is an individual right, but this could be the pathway to get the fun stuff.

Surprised CNN ran it.

Nicki

Vlad 11
07-24-2012, 8:54 PM
Flipping thru the channels and just watched Cooper Anderson just blathering on and on about gun control.

Cant wait until this news cycle fades but unfortunately this coward perpetrator is alive. Now we have to endure this idiocy every time his punkgas makes an appearance and thru a whole trial that will be sensationalized.

Fortunately, more and more people seem to be seeing thru the sensationalist deceptions

ASTMedic
07-24-2012, 9:08 PM
Yes we got Heller/MacDonald rulings that the second amendment is an individual right, but this could be the pathway to get the fun stuff.

I'm right there with you. An AT-4 would do great at knocking off the coyotes that come after our chickens.

Dantedamean
07-24-2012, 10:34 PM
Factually correct or not, I like his idea.

ja308
07-24-2012, 10:43 PM
I have CNN on a permanent block --- no interest in anything they say ,do or advocate .
On a positive note however i have not heard where they altered a 911 tape as NBC did with Zimmerman
Or altered a video tape as ABC did with Zimmerman .
ABC again calls the jokers mom and asks if (joker ) is her son , she replies "you got the right person" this was 5am and no word of shooting had reached the mother.
She merely confirmed she has a son by that name -- ABC pretends the statement was made after he was caught ! lying, gun grabbing,decietful, propagandist who each are democratic party operatives .



Reading all this garbage I have just decided ABC+ NBC have earned the reputation of ZERO CREDIBILITY .
From this moment forward ,both will join CNN as being permently blocked !
Good ridance to bad journalism

sandwich
07-24-2012, 11:24 PM
They want to hear from gun owners. I've read a number of them and most are pretty good.


The link you want to start with is:
http://ireport.cnn.com/topics/818658

Another good one: "Now I Join the Other Team"
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-819256

smirnus3000
07-24-2012, 11:40 PM
agreed!!

Factually correct or not, I like his idea.

Extra411
07-25-2012, 12:11 AM
Hi Mendo:

Could you provide a source for
1. the numbers dont lie, for every homicide committed by a firearm in the US, 100 gun owners use their firearms for self defense. Compared to the 1 million+ defensive gun uses in our country, the 10k gun deaths pale in comparisson.

I'm not picking on you, but I am curious to see the source and whether that statement can be verified.

ja308
07-25-2012, 1:00 PM
The probable sourse for the above would be from Proffersor Gary Kleck -- a crimininolgist University of Florida.
another more detailed study is "More guns less crime " Proff.John Lott univerisity of Chicago .
Kleck had the fiqure of 50 thousand times a week law abiding folks use guns to protect lives and property -- 99% of the time a shot is NOT required .

I believe Kleck included cases where the crime was not committed for fear the victim was armed .

Ratboy
07-25-2012, 2:42 PM
Factually correct or not, I like his idea.

Yeah, me too.

YubaRiver
07-25-2012, 2:46 PM
Your letter doesn't impress me without links. Brady's spout all sorts of
stuff but have little to back them up. Don't be one of those guys.

Ratboy
07-25-2012, 2:49 PM
YubaRiver- Who are you referring to?

Dreaded Claymore
07-25-2012, 3:05 PM
I'm right there with you. An AT-4 would do great at knocking off the coyotes that come after our chickens.

http://i845.photobucket.com/albums/ab17/DreadedClaymore/not_sure_if_serious.jpg

MaHoTex
07-25-2012, 3:51 PM
i want to write something myself that appeals to the younger hipster urban crowd....in a very factual basis that relies on certain points.

Before you submit anytihng for the world to see, please use the capital letters in the proper locations.

Your content is good.

CDFingers
07-26-2012, 7:03 AM
I posted positive support for his proposal about ditching all gun regs in exchange for being trained to be in the irregular militia. It is voluntary--which is good because I'm too old. But any invading zombies have to know that old grouchy guys with guns are not to be trifled with...

CDFingers

SanPedroShooter
07-26-2012, 7:36 AM
I posted positive support for his proposal about ditching all gun regs in exchange for being trained to be in the irregular militia. It is voluntary--which is good because I'm too old. But any invading zombies have to know that old grouchy guys with guns are not to be trifled with...

CDFingers

Legal questions aside, I wasnt repelled by some of the major proposals. A large force of armed and trained civillians is the goal right?

I suppose the question is how do we get there. I would certianly volunteer for bi annual state miltia training, in a heartbeat. I've done it before, just in the regular forces. I would definetly consider trading in all state and federal gun laws for being part of a 'well regulated militia'.

I might even go further and look at a Swiss or Israely model, but thats another argument.

DannyInSoCal
07-26-2012, 7:56 AM
I would comment -

But I don't want to give that azzrag my info.....

SanPedroShooter
07-26-2012, 8:03 AM
Yeah no ****. F CNN. They can count the eyeballs and extrapolate from there. I dont want to be tied to that sinking ship in any way, shape of form.

ESPONDA
07-26-2012, 8:03 AM
That would be great to go thru training and learn how to shoot and operate firearms and be part of a group of society that is ready to respond in times of disasters, civil unrest, anything that we can help out on! However, is this realistic? Able bodied men and women? Are you sure about that? Have been to some of the latest gun shows already? I mean they are a heart attack waiting to happen! Older PHAT men mumbling to each other in the aisles telling all kinds of combat stories about this and that. Chowing down on burgers and fries, shooting the bull is all they know how to do! How would these guys even pass the physical fitness tests? Militia Act of 2012 would need some defibrillators nearby! I am gonna start doing major burpies and jumping jacks so I can qualify!

sharxbyte
07-26-2012, 8:31 AM
I bookmarked this thread o.o

Ripon83
07-26-2012, 8:53 AM
The liberal wet dream. Submit to a shrink for "evaluation" twice a year or face severe criminal penalties at the federal level for owning or possessing a firearm. Screw them....what part of the right of the people to keep and bear arms doesn't the moron understand?

JackRydden224
07-26-2012, 10:10 AM
An educated liberal gun owner who happens to be a vegetarian?

That's the guy we need on our side. That's the guy the general public can sympathize with.

IVC
07-26-2012, 11:38 AM
An educated liberal gun owner who happens to be a vegetarian?

That's the guy we need on our side. That's the guy the general public can sympathize with.

You said it :).

(disclosure: just a joke, not implying anything wrong).

NYsteveZ
07-26-2012, 11:47 AM
Dupe, but...Honestly a majority of the posts/stories there are very positive.

JackRydden224
07-26-2012, 11:47 AM
You said it :).

(disclosure: just a joke, not implying anything wrong).

Hehe I can take a joke or two and maybe a shot in between the legs.

My point is that the general public's image of a gun owner is probably a gangsta'h, a criminal or a cowboy. It would help our fight if the general public (read sheeple) realizes that we are just the normal folk...in some cases a hippie vegetarian dude :D

furyous68
07-26-2012, 11:48 AM
This guy is hilarious.... and Canadian :D LOL

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-819429

AeroEngi
07-26-2012, 11:54 AM
Hi Mendo:

Could you provide a source for


I'm not picking on you, but I am curious to see the source and whether that statement can be verified.

Found this through Google. It has all kinds of stats with the sources listed at the bottom.

http://gunowners.org/sk0802.htm

db.40
07-26-2012, 12:07 PM
I agree with the point made that RKBA is an individual right, but that doesn't mean we should, as a society, dismiss the idea of a militia and what the militia represents. I think this article is a good start and an interesting idea, I just can't get behind his "full-auto" argument.

Mendo223
07-26-2012, 12:17 PM
Before you submit anytihng for the world to see, please use the capital letters in the proper locations.

Your content is good.

yea sorry been typin on a tablet which is hard to punctuate and spell...

but if anyone wants to add to or clarify my post....its going to be added to a ron paul political website soon that my friend runs IN san francisco...so right in the hornets nest.


also CNN is BS...but i did catch piers morgan/tony blair interview last night...and it was fascinating to see tony blair totally dodge the gun control issue. he said something along the lines of "america is a totally different country than UK, guns are enshrined in their culture dating back hundreds of years, their country was founded on guns. its a totally different gun culture that the UK can not relate to, and its up to the US itself to figure out how to solve gun violence" you could just see the dissapointment in pier morgans smug little face...and he quickly changed the subject LOL!

Mendo223
07-26-2012, 12:21 PM
and yea all my statistics were found on unbiased gun websites for the most part...the numbers are debated, but even the anti gun lobby admits that guns are used at least 800,000 times for defensive use....whereas pro gun sites say 2.5 million....so its somewhere in the range of 800k-2.5 per year.

there was a gun control cartoon showing a chalkboard with the words "2nd amendment scorecard"

on one side was "overthrown tyrants" and the other side "wives, daughters, children, innocentpeople".....zero marks under tyrants but the other side was full of them..

one of my friends posted this on his facebook and i quickly set him straight....laced him with the facts and numbers, and showed that his cartoon was blatently wrong since it did not have a section for "number of people saved by legal defensive gun use" that would have had 100 times more blips than the gun death side...


800k-2.5 million vs 10k gun homicides DOES NOT LIE....guns save more lives than they take. and even if you throw in anohter 15k for gun suicides the numbers still PALE...

Bill Carson
07-26-2012, 12:28 PM
Had to post this one since I thought it was so good:

I am young. I have "hipster" friends. I have a graduate degree in Environmental History. I consider myself an academic in every sense of the word. I am a vegetarian. I believe in global warming. I am active, healthy, informed, and generally a paragon of the liberal arts educated, white, middleclass American.
With of these factors in mind, one might find my love of guns surprising. In fact, my wife and I currently own three: a .380 handgun designed specifically for carrying comfortably, a .40 handgun with 15rd ammo capacity, and a shotgun that, though sometimes used for skeet shooting, sits hidden in my bedroom loaded with police buckshot. I donít hunt, and doubt I have what it takes to kill an animal; especially since I am a vegetarian.
So why the heck does someone like me own a gun, have a concealed carry permit, and become extremely excited when President Obama allowed guns into Americaís National Parks? Why do I support a further loosening of gun controls; particularly with respect to where I can take a loaded firearm? Here are four reasons:
Reason 1: Reality - No matter how hard we try, people are fundamentally capable of very evil acts. Utopianism, in all its forms, has been the dream of many societies. It has never been achieved. Whether the threat is external, internal, or from my own tyrannical government, threats are real. Many people tend to dismiss the previous sentence as paranoia. However, such immediate dismissal speaks to broader social trends. Americans have a false sense of security. Yet, we are constantly reminded that earth is a fragile place. Global warming is exhibit A. To say that I should trust someone else to care for me in every eventuality is foolishness. Natural disasters, disease, social unrest, political tyranny, or a simple home invasion can all turn my safe little world upside down in a second. There is a reason why we have fire extinguishers and fire escape plans; disasters happen, more often than we would like to believe. Governments are there to pick up the pieces. When that moment comes, I cannot and should not assume that someone else can help me. Gunís empower the me to protect my family when appropriate. That moment could come at any time and in any place. To think otherwise is presumptuous. Whether itís a grizzly in Yellowstone or a nut in a movie theatre, I should be able to choose to defend myself, in the moment that I deem necessary.
Reason 2: History Ė Our foundersí inclusion of guns rights in the Constitution was historically unprecedented. It speaks to the society that the founders envisioned. Historically, every government that has trended toward centralization has tried to disarm its populous. Societies with the weakest and most decentralized forms of government always have almost universal ownership of weapons. The stronger a government gets, the more it seeks to dictate features of its society. Weapons, in all their historical forms, scream to be controlled. In a civilianís hands, they represent a severe check to the power. There was a reason that Southern slave owners were paranoid about weapons falling into the hands of their slaves. As soon as the oppressed obtain the means of resistance, external authority is totally undermined. The Arab Spring in Libya and Syria is case in point. We have cheered the use of weapons there. There are times when violence, like our own Revolution, brings about a social good. A study of history informed our founders that violence was a constant, and that a society where civilians take an interest in their own security is the noblest of all.
Reason 3: Fun Ė I understand that guns scare people. They can hurt. Kayaking scares me, as does mountain biking. I only do the latter, and then, only with extreme caution. However, just like rock climbing and football, guns are both dangerous and fun. They offer a challenge, a skill to be mastered, relaxation, water cooler discussion, bragging rights, and YouTube tutorials in the same way that power tools and Prada purses do. Like a chainsaw, they put the fun in functional. That has always been true. Usually, people who are afraid of guns change their minds once they learn to shoot them. I have plenty of anecdotal experience with that, though I cannot assume it is true for everyone.
Reason 4: Logical Legality Ė Theďwell regulatedĒ phrase, in the Second Amendment seems to indicate that government can impose some reasonable limits on weapons ownership. They have already done that in a sense. That we are not debating civilian ownership of anti-aircraft missile launchers is indicative of that. However, it is interesting to note that citizen militia groups, or more accurately artillery clubs, provided many of the early artillery units during the Civil War. Civilian ownership of heavy firepower is not unprecedented in our history. The right of Americans to bear arms is assured by the Constitution. This liberty is assured for a reason. Just saying that someone doesnít need an assault rifle doesnít make it true. There are other Constitutional rights that could be violated in the name of public safety. We could allow police to perform warrantless search and seizures on any suspect. We could allow police to arrest and indefinitely hold anyone they 'suspect' may be a threat to public safety. We could allow police to force confessions without a lawyer present or Miranda rights. Many of these are implied constitutional rights, and are not expressly found in the Bill of Rights. Imagine the crime and violence we could prevent if the police could do these things (the government IS constantly trying to gain these powers). Just think of the bad people we could remove from society! Yet, the fear of one injustice and the ďit could happen to meĒ factor cause us to accept that bad people will run free so that I can too. Sometimes you have to accept the riffraff so that individuals can enjoy liberty. Itís tough, but it is what makes us Americans.
A Final Case Study - Some argue that we simply need better licensing and controls on who gets a gun. The closest analogy to firearms, in terms of danger and desire for control, is automobile use. Americans have a system in place to license drivers. However, a driverís license does not prevent foolish behavior on the road. Likewise, there is nothing preventing someone without a license from getting into a car and driving. Perhaps the fear of punishment keeps some 15 year olds from doing that, but some still do. Laws just are not a deterrent for crazy. You can license, regulate, and register all you want, but it will never stop crazy. We want broad freedom for driving, and yet, the right to transport oneís self is not even in the Constitution!
In closing, it is important to note that we live in a very strange time in history. It is not that we are less violent; the last century proved that. It is that we have tried to avoid seeing violence and suffering. People die every day, but we avoid seeing it in person. We put our elders in nursing homes, we allow the slaughter houses to butcher our meat, and pay others to fight our wars while refusing to form the citizen armies as our founders leaned toward. However, we still like to see violence when it conforms to our tastes. We get our fix in video games and movies, but we arenít actually loosing anything important when people die there. There are no risks involved, so we get the sensation of violence, without consequence. I say this only to point out that those who argue that our society is gradually trending toward a violence free world is ridiculous. We have simply moved some things around to isolate ourselves from the harsh realities humans have faced for millennia, and many people still face today. Those that believe that we can eventually move to a new and better world free from violence, death, and human suffering discount history, human nature, and just plain crazy. Letís face it, America is great because we have taken calculated risks in allowing each other the right to choose our own destinies. This system, strikes a balance between anarchy and tyranny. Incidentally, the only constitutional right that protects the individual from both extremes, can be found in the Second Amendment.
. I donít hunt, and doubt I have what it takes to kill an animal. Why have a gun loaded in your bedroom or CCW ? Is it beacuse you believe scaring someone with your gun instead of actually using it will suffice in your time of need?

EM2
07-26-2012, 12:29 PM
I have CNN on a permanent block --- no interest in anything they say ,do or advocate .
On a positive note however i have not heard where they altered a 911 tape as NBC did with Zimmerman
Or altered a video tape as ABC did with Zimmerman .
ABC again calls the jokers mom and asks if (joker ) is her son , she replies "you got the right person" this was 5am and no word of shooting had reached the mother.
She merely confirmed she has a son by that name -- ABC pretends the statement was made after he was caught ! lying, gun grabbing,decietful, propagandist who each are democratic party operatives .



Reading all this garbage I have just decided ABC+ NBC have earned the reputation of ZERO CREDIBILITY .
From this moment forward ,both will join CNN as being permently blocked !
Good ridance to bad journalism


This is not accurate.

When they called her they asked if she was the mother of so and so and she responded "you have the right person" meaning that SHE was the person they were seeking (the mother of so and so). This was of course before they announced the reason for the call.

As we can see it is very easy to confuse people with the english language and it's use.

But hey what good are the details if they do not fit the narrative.

ElvenSoul
07-26-2012, 12:40 PM
I see one problem - Oswald was highly trained with weapons.

You can do all the screening and test you want. If someone has bad intentions and wants a weapon. They are going to get it. In the short story Johny Mneumonic, Johny goes Low Tech with a sawed off shotgun. Before he could go Low Tech, he had to go high tech. Make the shot gun and shells from rough stock on CNC Machine.