The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 195
  1. #101

    Default

    Then where is my rocket launcher? Or anti aircraft missile launcher? Or nuclear bomb? That is, if the constitution says I can can own any weapon? Discretion is and has been applied. The question is not whether the re should be discretion, but what that discretion should be.


    11 members found this post helpful.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Mar. 10, 2007
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    5,281

    Default

    If believed deep down that taking the weapons from law-abiding citizens would cut down on the criminal use of them I would readily concede the point. But in THIS society I just don't think it's the only thing. If I even half way thought it was worth a try I would happily do it... but I don't think it's the thing. THINK, I think about it. I'm around people with guns every day, we use them just about every day. I come from a gun culture and have never known one to be used with malice personally.

    I think mass technology media and social media, violent video games, disconnected and/or overwhelmed parents, ill treatment of other people in society (that you can see enacted every single day here on this board just like every other place in the world), "bullying", cost of health care, implications of mental health care, politically correct crap and lack of discipline ALL contribute just as much as the gun and probably more.

    If we were effectively working on any or all of that I'd be interested in giving up something from my little corner of the Constitution.


    8 members found this post helpful.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    4,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 2bayboys View Post
    I have been employed by a city PD for 22 years and I am very familiar with the qualification requirements for police officers. I researched and rewrote our directives. I do not believe that police officers should be the only armed members of our society, there simply aren't enough of them.
    And no one has said that the PD should be the only armed members of our society. They are better prepared to deal with criminals, they are trained for it. So please read for comprehension.



  4. #104
    Join Date
    May. 5, 2002
    Posts
    1,664

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lilitiger2 View Post
    Great post, G, although I do not believe that true "military grade" firearms, ie those that can be switched from semi-auto to full auto, are available to the average citizen. There are lot of weapons designed to look like military grade but are not, in fact (I know for sure you know this!). Funny to be wrapping presents, and listening to "I saw mommy kissing santa claus" and intermittently discussing military grade weapons!! Hope everyone is having a lovely evening!!
    Yes, I think guns classified as full auto are not available to the general public. I think you have to have a special license and all kinds of other checks etc. Many semi auto weapons have an cosmetic "assault weapon" (whatever that is really) look to them. And many people don't realize that most weapons these days would be considered semi auto.

    Second on the great post G!

    Merry Christmas all.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    14,976

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cowboymom View Post
    I think mass technology media and social media, violent video games, disconnected and/or overwhelmed parents, ill treatment of other people in society (that you can see enacted every single day here on this board just like every other place in the world), "bullying", cost of health care, implications of mental health care, politically correct crap and lack of discipline ALL contribute just as much as the gun and probably more.
    Many other countries have similar issues, but only a fraction of the gun crimes.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Mar. 10, 2007
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    5,281

    Default

    I don't think our country can be compared to others very well. I know we have similarities with some but we are still very much our own entity.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    18,639

    Default

    Since "well regulated Militia" is part of the 2nd Amendment, how about we require all people who own guns to be members of the National Guard with all that implies? You want to own a gun, you join the well regulated Militia.

    That's how the Swiss do it.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire


    4 members found this post helpful.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Feb. 5, 2010
    Posts
    2,437

    Default

    I'm sorry, but "more guns" is never the answer. Never. Do you really want an ex-military person armed at your school? What us he suffers from PTSD or has a flashback and thinks he's in Iraq and guns down a bunch of kids? Or, who do you think will be the first person to be shot? The armed guard who has been working the school for years and has let his guard down. And what are the chances of the armed guard being able to get to the shooting scene immediately? Pretty low.

    Honestly, the NRA is just so out of touch. First it was "guns don't kill people, people kill people" and now it's "guns don't kill people, video games kill people. Um, no, bullets fired from guns kill people. There simply isn't anything else readily and easily available that can kill so many people so quickly. You can't walk into WalMart an buy a bomb or a bunch of C-4 or whatever, but you can buy a gun that can be very easily made to fire 100 rounds a minute. WHY is that necessary, except for killing lath amounts of people quickly?

    The rights of the individual simply do not outweigh the rights of the rest of the population.

    Maybe we need to follow the Chris Rock theory on gun control. It goes something like, "We don't need gun control. We need BULLET control. I think every bullet should cost $5,000. That way, there would be no innocent bystanders. People would be like 'D@mm, he's got $50,000 worth of bullets in his a$$--he must have done * something* bad!'"

    My apologies for any misspellings, typos, and the like. I'm on my phone.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    May. 6, 2006
    Location
    rapidan,virginia
    Posts
    1,533

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    And no one has said that the PD should be the only armed members of our society. They are better prepared to deal with criminals, they are trained for it. So please read for comprehension.
    My goodness, then where do we disagree? I agree that officers are more prepared and trained in firearms than the average citizen, but I do not agree that a person must have the same qualifications as law enforcement in order to be capable of carrying a weapon for self protection. I am usually quite competent at reading comprehension, I apologize if I have misunderstood your argument.
    "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu, The Art of War
    Rainy: http://tinyurl.com/kj7x53c
    Stash: http://tinyurl.com/mmm3p4e


    2 members found this post helpful.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Feb. 5, 2010
    Posts
    2,437

    Default

    Oh, and the idea that was thrown out about having teachers armed--seriously? They already have to deal with low pay, conferences, grading tests/assignments, lesson plans, etc., etc., not to mention sometimes having to teach kids very basic life lessons that their parents have neglected to do. My mom was a teacher and I saw first-hand how much she had to deal with (and topping out around $28,00 salary, with a master's degree) and there is no way she could have also dealt with all the training and target practice and skill necessary to also be responsible for defending children from a gunman. And then you have a gun in the classroom. We all know that things with guns can go terribly wrong very quickly. What if a teacher snaps and starts shooting kids? What if a kid is accidentally shot? What if a ki gets hold of the gun?

    Again, "more guns" is just not the answer. It should be much more difficult to get a gun, purchasers should be thoroughly screened, and we need to do away with semi-automatic weapons. That will be a huge step in the right direction.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  11. #111
    Join Date
    May. 5, 2002
    Posts
    1,664

    Default

    Frizzle,
    I don't think the suggestion was to force teachers to carry a gun, just to allow those teachers that would like to carry one the proper education and training. I would be totally against requiring teachers to carry guns. If someone does not want to carry a gun they shouldn't have to. And forcing someone that is uncomfortable with guns to carry one would be a set up for problems. And if teachers were to be allowed to carry guns if they wanted, they would probably be concealed on the teachers person, not lying around a class room where students could get them.

    And as far as banning semi-automatic weapons, most guns are semi-automatic weapons. And that includes most weapons used for recreational target shooting, some hunting, competition shooting, as well as home defense.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Mar. 10, 2007
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    5,281

    Default

    I would trust MYSELF to stop a gunman in any place-it isn't that complicated to at least give them something else to concentrate on, get a clear background and start being a deterrent at least.

    From the article linked above that I'm sure a lot of people didn't read yet http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/20...-gun-control/:

    ""The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by law enforcement: 14. The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by civilians: 2.5. The reason is simple. The armed civilians are there when it started.

    But this leads to the inevitable shrieking and straw man arguments about guns in the classroom, and then the pacifistic minded who simply can’t comprehend themselves being mandated to carry a gun, or those that believe teachers are all too incompetent and can’t be trusted. Let me address both at one time.

    Don’t make it mandatory. In my experience, the only people who are worth a darn with a gun are the ones who wish to take responsibility and carry a gun. Make it voluntary. It is rather simple. Just make it so that your state’s concealed weapons laws trump the Federal Gun Free School Zones act. All that means is that teachers who voluntarily decide to get a concealed weapons permit are capable of carrying their guns at work. Easy. Simple. Cheap. Available now.

    Then they’ll say that this is impossible, and give me all sorts of terrible worst case scenarios about all of the horrors that will happen with a gun in the classroom… No problem, because this has happened before. In fact, my state laws allow for somebody with a concealed weapons permit to carry a gun in a school right now. Yes. Utah has armed teachers. We have for several years now.""


    7 members found this post helpful.

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Aug. 25, 2007
    Posts
    8,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    And then there are the people who cannot even reconsider the semi and automatic weapons because it is some "right" that they feel trumps the loss of lives, even children's lives. Nice sentiment but I think that view is not the majority and hopefully some common sense will prevail in this society.
    Where do you get the idea that "rights" are governed by the will of the majority?

    What do you think the outcome would have been if a national referendum had been held in 1954 on declaring that "separate but equal is inherently unequal?"

    More recently multiple courts have negated popularly passed referendums that outlawed gay marriage.

    Polls regularly show that "negative campaign ads" ought to banned.

    Rights, as defined in the Constitution, can and do trump public sentiment.

    G.
    Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão


    3 members found this post helpful.

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    4,217

    Default

    I find it too funny that the NRA and many of the members think "more guns in everyone's hands" is the answer to the mass killings. Gee no vested interest in that theory.

    Really, I go back to my original thought, nothing means freedom like living under the scope of a sniper. It is not my vision and my husband does have a gun, locked up, as does our friend down the street homicide detective.

    Guns in the classroom, sad to see many on this board so supportive. Very sad, I guess that is how we arrived here.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Feb. 25, 2012
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    2,508

    Default

    [QUOTE=Frizzle;6736272]The rights of the individual simply do not outweigh the rights of the rest of the population.QUOTE]

    Actually, in the US we take individuals rights pretty seriously, to avoid the tyranny of the majority.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    4,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guilherme View Post
    Where do you get the idea that "rights" are governed by the will of the majority?

    What do you think the outcome would have been if a national referendum had been held in 1954 on declaring that "separate but equal is inherently unequal?"

    More recently multiple courts have negated popularly passed referendums that outlawed gay marriage.

    Polls regularly show that "negative campaign ads" ought to banned.

    Rights, as defined in the Constitution, can and do trump public sentiment.

    G.
    Your rights are not determined by you. There are many people in prison who have defined their rights incorrectly. Semi and automatic weapons were not a part of the second ammendment at the time it was written, and your opinion does not despute that fact. We shall see where the court side on this, I hope your position is soon outdated, just like bomb shelters.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    4,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guilherme View Post
    Where do you get the idea that "rights" are governed by the will of the majority?

    What do you think the outcome would have been if a national referendum had been held in 1954 on declaring that "separate but equal is inherently unequal?"

    More recently multiple courts have negated popularly passed referendums that outlawed gay marriage.

    Polls regularly show that "negative campaign ads" ought to banned.

    Rights, as defined in the Constitution, can and do trump public sentiment.

    G.
    Your rights are not determined by you. There are many people in prison who have defined their rights incorrectly. Semi and automatic weapons were not a part of the second ammendment at the time it was written, and your opinion does not despute that fact. We shall see where the court side on this, I hope your position is soon outdated, just like bomb shelters.



  18. #118
    Join Date
    Aug. 25, 2007
    Posts
    8,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    And no one has said that the PD should be the only armed members of our society. They are better prepared to deal with criminals, they are trained for it. So please read for comprehension.
    If you restrict private carry in a any given location then, by definition, the only lawful carry in that location WILL be by police officers. QED.

    BY LAW, the primary job of a police officer is to apprehend criminals. "To protect and serve" is a secondary mission. Again, by law, if an officer fails to "protect and serve" he might be disciplined by his department but if a person who was injured by the failure were to sue that officer and department they would quickly find that neither had a duty to act to protect any given person.

    I know this is not how TV cops operate, but Hollyweird is not well know for presenting reality in cop shows. Drama, yes. Reality, no.

    I noted in a prior post that CCW carriers not only have a lower crime rate than the general populace they have a lower crime rate than police officers. They are the modern embodiment of the Athenian, democratic ideal of exercising responsibility for the safety of society. I'll not say that every one meets this standard, but as a group they certainly do.

    G.
    Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão


    3 members found this post helpful.

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Oct. 31, 2001
    Location
    West of insanity, east of apathy, deep in the heart of Texas.
    Posts
    15,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmytbs View Post
    http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/21/us/con...html?hpt=hp_t2

    So what's to stop the next shooter to focus on a different venue: a playground, a skating rink, a church?

    Are we going to place armed guards in every public place in the country?
    No - we're going to do away with gun-free zones that give criminals/madmen a guaranteed place to commit murder and mayhem without resistance or repercussion.
    In loving memory of Laura Jahnke.
    A life lived by example, done too soon.
    www.caringbridge.org/page/laurajahnke/


    5 members found this post helpful.

  20. #120
    Join Date
    Oct. 28, 2007
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    4,169

    Default

    There is a policeman* in every NYC Public school. NYC has a very anti gun mayor and is solidly democratic. So... can you explain that to me again?

    * or security guard backed up by police
    "New York City already has about 5000 safety agents in the public schools who are trained by the NYPD. They do not have weapons but they are often supplemented by armed police officers assigned to schools. A total of 88 schools have metal detectors."


    1 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. USEF Armed Forces Attire
    By devildogtigress in forum Dressage
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: Feb. 4, 2012, 05:39 PM
  2. Well Armed
    By equinedriver in forum Racing
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Nov. 17, 2011, 01:08 PM
  3. armed, mounted, and wired.
    By charismaryllis in forum Off Course
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Aug. 12, 2011, 05:10 PM
  4. Warning to all Foxhunters! Foxes are now armed!
    By spotnnotfarm in forum Off Course
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Jan. 15, 2011, 12:26 PM
  5. Well Armed in TX - Anyone Connected?
    By Zevida in forum Racing
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Oct. 22, 2009, 05:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness