Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Social > Politics and News

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· AMD Video Cards
· Nvidia
· Displays
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Home and Garden
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2015
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-08-2013, 08:04 PM   #201
StinkyPinky
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: A sandpit with casinos
Posts: 5,719
Default

I don't get you guys. We already have gun control in this country. You cannot go out and buy or own certain weapons already and no one seemed to whine about the 2nd then.

No one (except a few extremists) is asking for a total gun ban. Just to tone it down a bit which we have done before in the past. Perhaps a limit on amount of guns owned and restricting certain types of firearms. If you want to buy a weapon in the mistaken belief it protects your family, then knock yourself out. Most "gun control" advocates don't have an issue with that. What we have an issue with is Mom and Pop owning a big bag of semi-auto weapons and stashing it under their bed so their mentally deranged or clinically depressed son can get access to them.
__________________
Intel i7 4790K, GIGABYTE Z97X-UD5H, 16GB G.SKILL Ares DDR3 1866MHz , ASUS R9 290X DirectCU II OC 4GB, Samsung SSD 840 EVO 500GB & 250GB + 2 & 4TB Seagate Barracuda. Dell U2515H WQHD Monitor.

Late 2013 13" Macbook Pro, Intel Core i5-4258U 2.4Ghz, Intel Iris 5100 GPU, 8GB ram, 256GB SSD
StinkyPinky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 08:09 PM   #202
spidey07
No Lifer
 
spidey07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 65,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StinkyPinky View Post
I don't get you guys. We already have gun control in this country. You cannot go out and buy or own certain weapons already and no one seemed to whine about the 2nd then.

No one (except a few extremists) is asking for a total gun ban. Just to tone it down a bit which we have done before in the past. Perhaps a limit on amount of guns owned and restricting certain types of firearms. If you want to buy a weapon in the mistaken belief it protects your family, then knock yourself out. Most "gun control" advocates don't have an issue with that. What we have an issue with is Mom and Pop owning a big bag of semi-auto weapons and stashing it under their bed so their mentally deranged or clinically depressed son can get access to them.
Right. Because what you described happens almost never but you want to fundamentally infringe on natural rights of defense.

NO!

You DO know that most fire arms are the deadly semi-automatic that sprays boolits, right? Of all the guns I own, only one isnt semi-auto...a pump action shotgun. You think that thing is any less deadly? It's probably the most deadly single shot I have.
__________________
___
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

Last edited by spidey07; 01-08-2013 at 08:13 PM.
spidey07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 08:15 PM   #203
Nemesis 1
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,379
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
Oh ok at least you recognize that there are LAWS that exist to regulate the sale of firearms

and amazingly these laws haven't broken any existing statute or gasp!

the Constitution!!

regardless of your definition of infringement...these laws are the Law of the Land.
No its the law of a corrupt gooberment , You about to know the law of the land. for those who think they can own land.
Nemesis 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 08:24 PM   #204
irishScott
Lifer
 
irishScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Delaware
Posts: 21,570
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StinkyPinky View Post
I don't get you guys. We already have gun control in this country. You cannot go out and buy or own certain weapons already and no one seemed to whine about the 2nd then.

No one (except a few extremists) is asking for a total gun ban. Just to tone it down a bit which we have done before in the past. Perhaps a limit on amount of guns owned and restricting certain types of firearms. If you want to buy a weapon in the mistaken belief it protects your family, then knock yourself out. Most "gun control" advocates don't have an issue with that. What we have an issue with is Mom and Pop owning a big bag of semi-auto weapons and stashing it under their bed so their mentally deranged or clinically depressed son can get access to them.
Do you even know what semi-auto means? Without googling? I don't think you do, you're using it very, very wrong. I mean "confusing a stick shift for an automatic transmission" wrong. And that's a big part of the problem.

And you misunderstand the mentality of gun ownership. Sure there are some paranoids out there, but I think even they understand that the gun in and of itself does nothing. It's the user behind it that matters. Suffice it to say most gun owners are.. normal. As in you wouldn't know they own guns unless they told you. They just don't make the media's agenda-driven news.

The Virginia tech shooting involved two handguns. One with ten rounds in the magazine and one with 15 rounds in the magazine. Granted the latter would be an "assault weapon", but the point is he carried a shit-ton of reloads. And guess what? He killed more people than the Sandy Hook Psycho, despite his lack of big scary black boom stick (as opposed to tame, folksy, wooden boom stick with near identical capabilities).

And even if you limit detachable mags, you know what I can do? I can tape several of them together with fucking packaging tape, meaning to reload all I have to do is pop out old mag, move magazine array half an inch, pop in new mag. It's ridiculously easy and has been around since Vietnam.

And you know what? I and many gun owners wouldn't have much issue with things like mental health checks and such. In fact I know gun store owners who support such measures. But no one, not a single senator or congressman, is proposing that. What they are proposing is a blanket ban, which is lazy legislating at best and the product of a destructive cultural agenda at worst.

There is no reason why anyone who can prove that they're mentally competent, law-abiding, and a proficient shooter should not be able to own an assault weapon. Agreed? So where's that bill?

So long as the charge is led by the likes of Feinstein and McCarthy, who's anti-gun zealotry rivals that of suicide bombers (and is just as stupid), it's going to be very hard to convince me that any gun control is a good idea. Even if we were in fantasy land and it were effective in the US, I wouldn't trust the federal government to implement it in the slightest.
__________________
Heatware
irishScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 08:46 PM   #205
irishScott
Lifer
 
irishScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Delaware
Posts: 21,570
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
I never called lawmakers smart people that is your doing.

Figures since you are also pannicked that people are trying to take away your guns...
It is?

Quote:
Just understand..there are people that are smarter than you, and they are tasked with the job of determining whether you gun nuts need to have access to firearms or materials that don't need to be on public streets.
^^^ Sound familiar?


Panicked? Is that what you think? I feel strongly about this issue yes, but panicked? Lol. You could ban all guns and I'd be fine. It's the broader implications I'm worried about. You don't restrict freedom in any context without a solid, factual reason or very strong theories. There is no factual reason to ban assault weapons or high capacity magazines (essentially every study done on the Clinton ban showed no measurable difference in gun crime), there are no strong theories.

There ARE factual reasons and strong theories to institute things like mental health checks, mandatory training, that sort of thing. But that obvious step is lost on so many that there has to be an ulterior motive. And I don't even have to look for it, it's being brandished by those leading the charge. Feinstein herself voted for the freaking UN to have a say in determining domestic US gun laws. SCOTUS just barely passed the protections on an individual right to bear arms.

I have no heard a single moderate voice asking for reasonable gun control. It's all "ban this, ban that, that looks scary ban it too; just in case". "Oh and the vast majority of law-abiding gun owners who haven't done anything wrong? Yeah, we'll say they're not the problem and then treat them like they are. Fucking hillbillies."

That's the attitude I hear from the majority of gun control advocates, and yeah it pisses me off. Namely because it's fucking stupid. Never-mind that they almost always demonstrate pathetic lack of knowledge about the very thing they seek to regulate. You talk to a gun rights advocate and he/she pulls out a bunch of stats. Even if they're bad numbers, I can guarantee very few gun control advocates can do the same. You know why that is? Because gun control advocates are usually the ones doing the attacking, and gun rights advocates have to repeatably defend themselves.

Until that changes, yeah, I'm not putting my gun rights in the hands of any politicians; and certainly not in the hands of anyone who knows as much about guns as a 3rd grader does about calculus.
__________________
Heatware

Last edited by irishScott; 01-08-2013 at 11:44 PM.
irishScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 11:33 PM   #206
1prophet
Diamond Member
 
1prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raildogg View Post
You don't want to ever be in that position where you make instruments of violence for a living. Such terrible conditions there.

It is amazing how humanity cherishes their weapons more than their families or any human life. (Of course, the reply will be that guns are there to protect, etc). Maybe guns are just an extension of the human psyche. They represent his true nature, which is very violent.

Say again,

lots of people make a good living off these instruments of violence, while living in not so terrible conditions,

yet somehow this is acceptable while the rag tag Afghani making guns is not.











__________________
:music:...Ly-O-Lay-Ale-Loya Áigi Normo Jovnna
1prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:13 AM   #207
xj0hnx
Diamond Member
 
xj0hnx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
take all the gun threads and post this response.

thanks you!
Why? As what I posted in response to it clearly shows, it and his interpretation are 100% wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
Just understand..there are people that are smarter than you, and they are tasked with the job of determining whether you gun nuts need to have access to firearms or materials that don't need to be on public streets.
First off, I don't need some politician to tell me which firearms I can have, or if I can have them at all. My right to have a firearm are as protected as your right to post your dribble on this forum. Second, to the bolded, um ...no, they aren't, all one has to do is read the bills, and actually know something about firearms to see that, or one could simply Google "McCarthy barrel shroud" and watch the idiocy ooze from her ignorant snatch ...

http://*******/VOFazK

Quote:
Simply put, you can have guns. No one is taking away that right. Unfortunately some guns (and related material) just should not be suitable for public consumption.
Except that their past track record has been a miserable failure, and funny enough the guns that scared you totalitarian progressives the most aren't even affected in any meaningful way.

Quote:
why is that a hard concept to understand?
Don't know, why is it so hard for you to understand?

Quote:
Instead of railing like idiots about starting a new revolution or the 'American People' will raise up..if you try to take away our freedums!!

be a part of a fracking solution to come up with sensible gun legislation.
Because those "smart" people don't want "sensible" gun legislation, they want to ban as many guns as they can and still get re-elected. Because the problem isn't the guns, it's the people, but going after the real problem doesn't have the emotional impact that trying to ban scary "military" weapons does.
__________________
www.svc.com

i7 920 | EVGA X58 E758-A1 | HIS HD6870 |12GB Crucial DDR3 | 5.5TB | OS X 10.6.8

Heat
xj0hnx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 01:35 PM   #208
OrByte
Diamond Member
 
OrByte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: sacramento
Posts: 8,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xj0hnx View Post
Why? As what I posted in response to it clearly shows, it and his interpretation are 100% wrong.



First off, I don't need some politician to tell me which firearms I can have, or if I can have them at all. My right to have a firearm are as protected as your right to post your dribble on this forum. Second, to the bolded, um ...no, they aren't, all one has to do is read the bills, and actually know something about firearms to see that, or one could simply Google "McCarthy barrel shroud" and watch the idiocy ooze from her ignorant snatch ...

http://*******/VOFazK



Except that their past track record has been a miserable failure, and funny enough the guns that scared you totalitarian progressives the most aren't even affected in any meaningful way.



Don't know, why is it so hard for you to understand?



Because those "smart" people don't want "sensible" gun legislation, they want to ban as many guns as they can and still get re-elected. Because the problem isn't the guns, it's the people, but going after the real problem doesn't have the emotional impact that trying to ban scary "military" weapons does.
people like Feinstein want to ban weapons and materials in order to hurt the gun industry and corporations. I have a problem with that and i agree that i dont think her bill goes in the right direction in terms of improving gun safety. But I'm not entirely dismissing her bill, I think its a start.

people like you want to hide behind the constitution so that you can play pretend GI JOEs with all your gun buddies...thats fine. But I think the 2nd Amendment argument is a complete farce..a joke..I think you guys are being led by the nose on a smoke and mirrors campaign to keep the money flowing to the gun industry, and thats pathetic. No one is taking away the 2nd amendment. You may not like the fact that firearms and sales are regulated...tough sh!t. It is...deal with it.

people like me want considerate, reasonable, and logical controls put in place in terms of which firearms and materials should be allowed for public purchase, who should be allowed to purchase them and where guns should be allowed to be carried. That's where I think SMART people come into play....people like researchers, and mental health professionals...advocates for responsible gun ownership. People that are going to provide the data necessary to make reasoned descisions on gun safety. And give our legislators all the justification and data possible to legislate appropriately.

Heaven forbid this country has a reasonable conversation about this...and that is EXACTLY what the gun lobby/industry wants to avoid!!! And people like you and Mr. Frothy at the mouth Alex Jones and Piers Morgan perpetuate...this dysfunctional red herring argument that goes no where...and keeps money flowing to the gun industry.
__________________
"It is good to keep in mind that the screw that tightens the mechanism is also the one that loosens it." - From a Japanese air rifle manual, circa 1971

"Being happy doesn't mean that everything is perfect. It means that you have decided to look beyond the imperfections" - unknown
OrByte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 01:48 PM   #209
xj0hnx
Diamond Member
 
xj0hnx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
people like Feinstein want to ban weapons and materials in order to hurt the gun industry and corporations. I have a problem with that and i agree that i dont think her bill goes in the right direction in terms of improving gun safety. But I'm not entirely dismissing her bill, I think its a start.
It's not a start because it is a complete farce, and does nothing whatsoever to address the real problems.

Quote:
people like you want to hide behind the constitution
Don't like it? Change it, till then ...tough shit.

Quote:
so that you can play pretend GI JOEs with all your gun buddies...thats fine. But I think the 2nd Amendment argument is a complete farce..a joke..I think you guys are being led by the nose on a smoke and mirrors campaign to keep the money flowing to the gun industry, and thats pathetic.
No one is being lead by anything, if you think the "gun industry" is influencing how people think about the 2nd, and firearms then you are even more clueless than I thought.

Quote:
No one is taking away the 2nd amendment. You may not like the fact that firearms and sales are regulated...tough sh!t. It is...deal with it.
More asinine restrictions that do absolutely nothing to address the problem, and only affect law abiding firearms owners DO infringe on people's freedom protected by the 2nd whether YOU think so or not.

Quote:
people like me want considerate, reasonable, and logical controls put in place in terms of which firearms and materials should be allowed for public purchase, who should be allowed to purchase them and where guns should be allowed to be carried. That's where I think SMART people come into play....people like researchers, and mental health professionals...advocates for responsible gun ownership. People that are going to provide the data necessary to make reasoned descisions on gun safety. And give our legislators all the justification and data possible to legislate appropriately.
That not happening though. The pillars of anti-gun nut job ideas on gun legislation are distortions, and outright lies.

Quote:
Heaven forbid this country has a reasonable conversation about this...and that is EXACTLY what the gun lobby/industry wants to avoid!!! And people like you and Mr. Frothy at the mouth Alex Jones and Piers Morgan perpetuate...this dysfunctional red herring argument that goes no where...and keeps money flowing to the gun industry.
You speaking of red herrings is delicious ironing. There is no conversation coming from the anti-gun nut job lobby, that's you, there's fallacy, appeal to emotion, and lies.
__________________
www.svc.com

i7 920 | EVGA X58 E758-A1 | HIS HD6870 |12GB Crucial DDR3 | 5.5TB | OS X 10.6.8

Heat
xj0hnx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 02:00 PM   #210
OrByte
Diamond Member
 
OrByte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: sacramento
Posts: 8,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xj0hnx View Post

No one is being lead by anything, if you think the "gun industry" is influencing how people think about the 2nd, and firearms then you are even more clueless than I thought.
lol!!
__________________
"It is good to keep in mind that the screw that tightens the mechanism is also the one that loosens it." - From a Japanese air rifle manual, circa 1971

"Being happy doesn't mean that everything is perfect. It means that you have decided to look beyond the imperfections" - unknown
OrByte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 02:15 PM   #211
xj0hnx
Diamond Member
 
xj0hnx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
lol!!
The sum of your brain power on display.
__________________
www.svc.com

i7 920 | EVGA X58 E758-A1 | HIS HD6870 |12GB Crucial DDR3 | 5.5TB | OS X 10.6.8

Heat
xj0hnx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 02:27 PM   #212
irishScott
Lifer
 
irishScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Delaware
Posts: 21,570
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
lol!!
Can't speak for everyone but I was taught, in 4th grade history and up through high school (whenever it was touched on), that the purpose of the 2nd amendment was to ensure that the militias would still be around to overthrow the government if it became necessary. This was backed up by many of the quotes you've seen in this thread.

This was in a public school in a fairly liberal, extremely well off area of Northern Virginia over several different teachers.

Now granted that's not the primary reason I own guns, but it is a legitimate reason IMO; and in my case at least the freaking gun lobby had nothing to do with establishing that perspective. It's a perspective rooted in historical fact, even if the modern politics of it are only a few decades old.
__________________
Heatware
irishScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 03:00 PM   #213
OrByte
Diamond Member
 
OrByte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: sacramento
Posts: 8,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xj0hnx View Post
The sum of your brain power on display.
no actually I'm just not going to bother anymore

I can't lay out my position any clearer than I already did yet for some reason you call me out on appeals to emotion, fallacies, and other BS that frankly I think you are projecting something at this point which has nothing to do with me nor my positions

keep clinging to your guns and religion and 2nd amendment rights. Thanks
__________________
"It is good to keep in mind that the screw that tightens the mechanism is also the one that loosens it." - From a Japanese air rifle manual, circa 1971

"Being happy doesn't mean that everything is perfect. It means that you have decided to look beyond the imperfections" - unknown
OrByte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 03:02 PM   #214
OrByte
Diamond Member
 
OrByte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: sacramento
Posts: 8,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by irishScott View Post
Can't speak for everyone but I was taught, in 4th grade history and up through high school (whenever it was touched on), that the purpose of the 2nd amendment was to ensure that the militias would still be around to overthrow the government if it became necessary. This was backed up by many of the quotes you've seen in this thread.

This was in a public school in a fairly liberal, extremely well off area of Northern Virginia over several different teachers.

Now granted that's not the primary reason I own guns, but it is a legitimate reason IMO; and in my case at least the freaking gun lobby had nothing to do with establishing that perspective. It's a perspective rooted in historical fact, even if the modern politics of it are only a few decades old.
I am in TOTAL agreement with you and your 2nd amendment rights...you can have it..if it was a fvcking dish I would serve it to you myself.

I even enjoy the 2nd amendment rights too...I love my 2nd amendment rights

what I am trying to show you...is that this should not be about the 2nd amendment at all but rather gun regulation...something that is already being done!!
__________________
"It is good to keep in mind that the screw that tightens the mechanism is also the one that loosens it." - From a Japanese air rifle manual, circa 1971

"Being happy doesn't mean that everything is perfect. It means that you have decided to look beyond the imperfections" - unknown
OrByte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 03:02 PM   #215
spidey07
No Lifer
 
spidey07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 65,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
no actually I'm just not going to bother anymore

I can't lay out my position any clearer than I already did yet for some reason you call me out on appeals to emotion, fallacies, and other BS that frankly I think you are projecting something at this point which has nothing to do with me nor my positions

keep clinging to your guns and religion and 2nd amendment rights. Thanks
I will. They are natural rights and liberties that you, nor man, nor government can take away.
__________________
___
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
spidey07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 03:18 PM   #216
irishScott
Lifer
 
irishScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Delaware
Posts: 21,570
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
I am in TOTAL agreement with you and your 2nd amendment rights...you can have it..if it was a fvcking dish I would serve it to you myself.

I even enjoy the 2nd amendment rights too...I love my 2nd amendment rights

what I am trying to show you...is that this should not be about the 2nd amendment at all but rather gun regulation...something that is already being done!!
Oh it's all about gun regulation. Only the extreme minority thinks gun regulation (in most states) should be loosened. The 2nd amendment is brought in because of the gun control leaders' obvious and in some cases openly stated contempt for it.

Plus, politicians like extremes to rile up their constituents, and in this case innocent gun owners get caught in its wake. If the 2nd amendment can conceivably be used to defend these gun owners, why shouldn't they use it?

Politics is almost never about solving problems, that takes place on the lower levels when the politicians are convinced to let it happen. On the congressional and senate floor, it's all about power.
__________________
Heatware
irishScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 03:19 PM   #217
xj0hnx
Diamond Member
 
xj0hnx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post
no actually I'm just not going to bother anymore

I can't lay out my position and make any sense without appeals to emotion
Yes, I know, I know.
__________________
www.svc.com

i7 920 | EVGA X58 E758-A1 | HIS HD6870 |12GB Crucial DDR3 | 5.5TB | OS X 10.6.8

Heat
xj0hnx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 05:05 PM   #218
RabidMongoose
Lifer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,061
Default

It's shocking that the US has 50% of the world's guns. It's very troubling because a significant portion of our population is mentally sick, too.
RabidMongoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 07:08 PM   #219
rommelrommel
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,036
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabidMongoose View Post
It's shocking that the US has 50% of the world's guns. It's very troubling because a significant portion of our population is mentally sick, too.
Why is it shocking? Have you been living under a rock your whole life?

It's also wrong, but not massively... I keep seeing 875-900 million guns in existence. The US probably has 300 million or so. So somewhere around a third. I believe they're also counting guns held by the govt at all levels in that as well.
rommelrommel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 07:21 PM   #220
unokitty
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabidMongoose View Post
It's shocking that the US has 50% of the world's guns. It's very troubling because a significant portion of our population is mentally sick, too.

According to Wikipedia, North America contains 5.17 per cent of the world's population, yet it also controls 27.1 per cent of the world's net worth.

Do you find that troubling as well?

Uno
unokitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 04:43 PM   #221
sothsegger
Member
 
sothsegger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muse View Post
In yesterday's (Sunday) Oakland Tribune

Our gun-obsessed language reveals much about us

By Joe Lurie

Contra Costa Times/Oakland Tribune Guest Commentary
Posted: 01/05/2013 10:00:00 AM PST
Updated: 01/05/2013 04:34:52 PM PST

With 5 percent of the world's population, Americans now possess about half of the world's guns. Is it any wonder then that mass shootings in the U.S. have skyrocketed in the past decade? And in the wake of the grotesque massacre at Sandy Hook, is it surprising that sales of kids' bulletproof backpacks have soared, or that our culture more than ever is drenched in the language of guns?

As I watch left- and right-wing politicians and pundits "up in arms" on TV, battling in a "crossfire" of blame, each side looking for a "smoking gun" to explain or cast blame for horrifying gun-related catastrophes, I've become increasingly aware of how our culture's preoccupations with guns are reflected even during innocent "shooting the breeze" conversations.

We often value the "straight shooter," yet are wary of those who "shoot their mouths off," those who "shoot from the hip" or glibly end an argument with a "parting shot." We caution colleagues to avoid "shooting themselves in the foot," and counsel them not to "shoot the messenger."

Without suspecting what drives our language, we are "blown away" by adorable photos of loved ones. At the movies, many audiences are thrilled by "shoot-'em-up," "double-barreled action" scenes, or are excited by car chases where actors "gun" their engines.

I often ask friends to "shoot me" an email and I've encouraged job seekers to give an interview their "best shot" and "stick to their guns" during salary discussions. And if a job is offered, I might congratulate them for doing a "bang-up" job.

In sensitive business negotiations, I've advised patience, urging clients to "troubleshoot" solutions, but to avoid "jumping the gun" and to be aware of "loaded" questions." To get the biggest "bang for the buck," I've recommended bringing the "big guns" to the table. We look for "silver bullet" solutions, hoping for "bulletproof" results. And when success is in sight, we say: "You're on target," or "you're going great guns!"

We encourage entrepreneurial risk taking, even if the project doesn't have a "shot in hell." Just "fire away" when you make that "killer" presentation, and if your idea is "shot down," don't be "gun shy." Just "bite the bullet" and go at it again, with "guns blazing." Don't be afraid to "shoot for the moon," even if it looks like a "shot in the dark."

Having worked as a university executive with students from more than 80 countries, I've noticed that students from abroad are struck by the violent language in our songs and films, and they hear it bleeding into our political discourse.

Many have asked me in amazement why it is even necessary to state that guns and ammunition are banned from university residence halls. Yet, "son of a gun," 26 colleges in three states permit guns on college campuses. And gun liberalization legislation for colleges is in the "cross hairs" in at least nine more states.

I've heard staff and students alike stressed by an approaching deadline, instinctively describing themselves as being "under the gun." Sometimes my colleagues have described emotional co-workers as "loose cannons" or having "hair-trigger" personalities. And when a student has gone off "half-cocked," psychologists have advised employees to "keep their powders dry" and to review "bullet point" guidelines for handling volatile personalities.

In the same way that the U.S. is flooded with millions of guns (there are 90 guns per 100 Americans), so our newscasts -- "sure as shootin' " -- are exploding almost nightly with murder stories, reflecting the newsroom mantra: "If it bleeds, it leads."

When the local story becomes a national tragedy, there is "new ammunition" for both gun control supporters and opponents of fire arm bans in such places as elementary schools, day care centers, churches, or even the neighborhood bar!

The world of guns has had our rhetoric in its sights for a very long time. And our wounded language -- now more than ever with a gun to its head -- is telling us that our culture is on the firing line.
- - - -
Joe Lurie, executive director emeritus at the University of California's International House, is currently a cross-cultural communications consultant.
i hope you are not suggesting censorship of violence in films, language, or media. i, for one, don't feel that media violence causes actual violence. rather, something else is causing both media and actual violence. violence on film and tv is at least a creative way to process the violent energy in society. i feel censorship would increase actual violence, not reduce it.
__________________
when the saints go marching in, that's when I come staggering out
sothsegger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 04:54 PM   #222
Agent11
Diamond Member
 
Agent11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StinkyPinky View Post
I don't get you guys. We already have gun control in this country. You cannot go out and buy or own certain weapons already and no one seemed to whine about the 2nd then.

No one (except a few extremists) is asking for a total gun ban. Just to tone it down a bit which we have done before in the past. Perhaps a limit on amount of guns owned and restricting certain types of firearms. If you want to buy a weapon in the mistaken belief it protects your family, then knock yourself out. Most "gun control" advocates don't have an issue with that. What we have an issue with is Mom and Pop owning a big bag of semi-auto weapons and stashing it under their bed so their mentally deranged or clinically depressed son can get access to them.
How would restricting the number of fire arms owned by an individual stop mass shootings??

This is why we cannot relax. You guys keep opening your mouths with torrential amounts of stupid.
__________________
-11
Agent11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 05:03 PM   #223
sothsegger
Member
 
sothsegger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StinkyPinky View Post
I don't get you guys. We already have gun control in this country. You cannot go out and buy or own certain weapons already and no one seemed to whine about the 2nd then.

No one (except a few extremists) is asking for a total gun ban. Just to tone it down a bit which we have done before in the past. Perhaps a limit on amount of guns owned and restricting certain types of firearms. If you want to buy a weapon in the mistaken belief it protects your family, then knock yourself out. Most "gun control" advocates don't have an issue with that. What we have an issue with is Mom and Pop owning a big bag of semi-auto weapons and stashing it under their bed so their mentally deranged or clinically depressed son can get access to them.
watch out! "clinically depressed" doesn't mean prone to violence.
__________________
when the saints go marching in, that's when I come staggering out
sothsegger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 05:20 PM   #224
Broheim
Diamond Member
 
Broheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: with my auntie and uncle in Bel Air
Posts: 4,582
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrByte View Post

Just understand..there are people that are smarter than you, and they are tasked with the job of determining whether you gun nuts need to have access to firearms or materials that don't need to be on public streets.
just understand..there are people that are smarter than, and they are tasked with the job of determining whether people need to have <insert liberty here>

basically it seems like you'd love North Korea...

on a side note, I'm happy to report from a country with draconian gun laws that we have successfully disarmed all criminals and did not just have our third shooting this week... oh wait
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by free ipod View Post
It's Diffiult Process but you handle easily. I am Appriciate with your Perforamances...
Broheim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 05:44 PM   #225
spidey07
No Lifer
 
spidey07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 65,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent11 View Post
How would restricting the number of fire arms owned by an individual stop mass shootings??

This is why we cannot relax. You guys keep opening your mouths with torrential amounts of stupid.
Exactly. They slip up and let their real goals shine through.

Control.
__________________
___
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
spidey07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Alpha 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.