Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: What about TODAY? It's FIVE (5) DAYS later. Are we allowed to talk about sensible gun control NOW?

Posted 5 years ago on Dec. 15, 2012, 9:15 a.m. EST by therising (6643)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Just lay out the ads in the newspaper in advance. . . what could go wrong? http://hypervocal.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/SC-paper-gun-ad-newtown.jpeg .

Gail Collins in today's New York Times said: "We have come to regard ourselves — and the world has come to regard us — as a country that’s so gun happy that the right to traffic freely in the most obscene quantities of weapons is regarded as far more precious than an American’s right to health care or a good education." http://nyti.ms/QZ6UTK

When is America going to get over its gun craze and enact some sensible gun laws? Everyone including the president's spokesman said yesterday that the day was off limits for that discussion. Can we discuss it today? Are we allowed? When is it appropriate to discuss saving the lives of children? When's a good day for that?

Or are we so wrapped up in our "we're under attack" fantasy narrative that our obsession with being "a hero with a gun" outweighs the lives of innocents?

Also, we're the only industrialized nation that restricts health care but not guns. We should restrict guns and have fully accessible health care. How about that?

By the way, I think the onion, despite it's humor, might actually have it exactly right here concerning the NRA: http://www.theonion.com/articles/nra-sets-1000-killed-in-school-shooting-as-amount,28352/?ref=auto



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Gail Collins in today's New York Times: "We have come to regard ourselves — and the world has come to regard us — as a country that’s so gun happy that the right to traffic freely in the most obscene quantities of weapons is regarded as far more precious than an American’s right to health care or a good education." http://nyti.ms/QZ6UTK

[-] 1 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 5 years ago

Wonder what she says now after the three days and the bogus story is unraveling as we speak -- how many shooters?, two reported running past gym windows, masks, asperger kid who keeps his cool while methodically pumping two shots into every kid (Hello, aspergers can't handle novel stressful situations), oh and the two shots were from a gun found in his trunk after he took off his mask and shot himself. Please, the story is bogus, bogus, bogus. Just like the drugged up Batman shooter situation. Time to take a closer look at Virginia Tech, Columbine etc.

More here: http://occupywallst.org/forum/abc-nbc-reporting-223-round-used-in-shootingyou-kn/

[-] 3 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 5 years ago

We should reopen the mental hospitals for the paranoid schizophrenic, the psychotic and the psychopathic.

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Yup. And, for those that aren't that sick but are still under extreme high stress, universal health care like other countries have would help people feel able to seek help in many situations. We're the only major industrial power that doesn't have that. We're also the only one that restricts health care but not guns. We should restrict guns and have fully accessible health care. How about that?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 5 years ago

"universal health care helps people feel able to seek help in many situations."

Well said

The impact REAL public health care would have on society would be amazing. People above profit.

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Not that it matters a lot to me, but the 1% should want this too. It's cheaper to do preventative care all along and also healthy happy workers are more productive. For the most part, the 1% are clinically shortsighted.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Universal healthcare to so people have access to care.

[-] 1 points by Freebird (158) 5 years ago

America has always had guns. Mass killings are a recent phenomenom. So are SSRI drugs. Follow the drugs...


[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Former Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating was interviewed on CNN a few minutes ago and he was pushing for teachers and principals to carry guns in schools. He did it in kind of a scary kindly way wrapped up in sentimentality and concern for the children. I had thought that this initial chatter from gun zealots about more guns in elementary schools being the solution was just from the fringe, but now we're hearing it on mainstream media on CNN with people who are supposedly respected public officials. He also had the whole shtick down where he ignored the interviewers tough questions but seemed to come across as positive. He carefully talked about this being a problem of evil, hinting to the masses that they not only need to cling to their guns but also to their religion. He made it clear that there was no connection between all these shootings and our gun crazed culture. Then he went on to blame the entertainment industry.

People, we've entered the silly season. We need to find a way to have more nonviolent direct actions on this and other issues that draw attention to sources / websites with information about what's really going on here. We need to compete with the slick marketing that is going on right now directed towards the 99%. The 99% are being severely mislead on guns, the environment, the economy and much more. Here's how we can go further and compete with the propaganda of the 1% tat has cast a spell over the American public: http://occupywallst.org/forum/we-dont-see-the-power-we-have-in-our-hands-to-tran/


[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago


[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

They've gone full circle already. I've read the "victim" comments.

Now it's time to start in on conspriacy theory.

Oooooops....they did that already too.

Will they leave soon, at least until the next "incident"?

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

It is so ridiculous. Yes. They'll be back when duty calls to perform the necessary obfuscation.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

Will the NRA be rallying the troops tomorrow?

Or will they come to their senses?

You do recall the NRA conspiracy theory from before the election?

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

I think they'll rally the troops but do it a way tats wrapped up in concern. No substantive change in ther position, just their pr.

Not sure what theory you're referring to? Does it have something to do with the delusional fantasy some people have that "Obama is going to take your guns"?

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

That's the one I'm talking about.


It falls "right" in line with all the conspiracy theories popping up around here in recent days.

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

People live in a dreamworld. On a related note :) . . . Interested in yor thoughts over here if you get a chance. GOOD NEWS http://occupywallst.org/forum/new-view-why-gun-control-peace-treaties-campaign-f/

[-] 0 points by highlander (-163) 5 years ago

It can be discussed. I do no agree with it though. Because, for better or worse, there will be nuts and flakes. And, what's more, your health care access analogy is not related. If you want to follow that narrative, why not put more control on lotteries, casinos, UFC? Tylenol? Let's focus immediately on what can do the most good, right now. Not in your version of Utopia, but in the current, divided Congress. Gun control does not have a prayer. But you can focus on protection of the schools. such as, again, metal detectors, surveilance cameras at school entrances, exits. Call me a turd, but I do not wish to see this individual tragedy turn into some knee-jerk referendum on firearms.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

How many shootings like this have to happen before you stop calling any reaction to it a "knee jerk reaction"? :)

[-] 0 points by highlander (-163) 5 years ago

In case it is not obvious by now. I am a strong believer in individual right and responsibility. In a way, that is troubling to me, because it seems to me sometimes that I put my own interests above the common good. After some soul searching and shots of vodka, I have come to the conclusion that I will have to take my chances with the freedoms I have and I do not want to give them up. At this early stage in the investigation, there appears to me to be two courses of action.
The first course is to take away freedoms, be it firearms, censorship in media outlets, etc. I simply do not believe that that will solve the problem. There have been Mansons, Jim Jones's, Richard Specks, and on and on and on from the beginning of this nation. firearms and music did not make them; it just provides means and fertilizer for those minds that lean that way. The second course would not take away freedoms. How about metal detectors? Some sort of psychological profile similar to immunization records?
I care about children. I care about innocents. But I am not an irresponsible child (just take my word for it!) and I do not want to lose my freedoms because of the criminals in this country. You may ask me why I would wish to hold semiautomatic rifles and high capacity magazines. Call me crazy, but let's call it a, what's the term? an insurance policy in the remote event this country falls apart under the weight of its own debt and dependencies. Much for the same reason people put up solar panels in their yards or get generators. By the way, my 11 year old son has repeatedly asked for a bb gun. I have repeatedly said no; he is not ready yet.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

C'mon. I don't believe that's really your perspective. You're way too smart to be a prepper. By falling prey to fear, you're actually undermining the very cause you seem to support (the stabilization of our nation). Fear is what the 1% want us to have. If we're fearful and distrustful of each other we won't realize that we, the 99%, have more in common than we have dividing us. It's not big government you should be afraid of. It's big corporations unchecked by strong government. Strong government is your / our ally. But first we need to unseat the corporatists who have hijacked our government. See Powell memo from 1971. Also check out this unique solution you may not have thought of. . . See post on here entitled GOOD NEWS.

[-] 0 points by rayolite (461) 5 years ago

Appropriate mental health care needs to be instituted first.

Unfortunately this also has the capacity to reveal unconscious programming and secrecy, so the infiltrated US government is very against it. They prefer gun control.

Knowing this, what do you prefer?

[-] 0 points by MsStacy (1035) 5 years ago

The only way you can alter the threat of guns is with an amendment. If the nation isn't willing to totally eliminate guns, repeal the second amendment, then you are wasting your time. The small restrictions passed on the type of ammunition, or clip size, or rate of fire can only lower the body count.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Well, lowering body count is a good start, right? And why must we choose? Why can't we push for both short term and long term solutions?

[-] 0 points by MsStacy (1035) 5 years ago

I'm simply stating that the reality is there isn't enough support to ban guns totally and regulations aren't effective when you're dealing with someone that has some mental illness. Push for whatever you think is a viable solution. I believe that there is no solution to the problem of violence, due to human nature.

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

So what is your explanation for murder rate in Britain vs U.S.?

[-] 0 points by MsStacy (1035) 5 years ago

I need to make my position clear. In my opinion, sensible gun control means eliminate handguns from the hands of the public. That, unfortunately isn't something you are going to get two thirds of the congress and two thirds of the states to go along with. I'd vote for a total ban, but I'm realistic enough to know I'm in the minority.

The choice is to eliminate handguns from private hands or allow them and expect these violent tragedies to occur. Gun control can't work if it's half heartedly applied in the form of regulating the ammunition or the size of the clip. Would yesterday's event be okay if only 5 children were killed? To the parents of those 5 it wouldn't matter.

Secondly humans are violent, but not all violent acts result in murder. Nations with lower murder rates are the same ones that strictly regulate access to guns. The UK still suffers from many violent criminal acts, but fortunately without the easy access to guns it usually stops short of death.

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

That's a false choice. You can have limits. It's not all or nothing.

[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 5 years ago

Perhaps, but it's my opinion that as long as handguns are available a determined disturbed individual will get one and use it.

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

That's just ignoring the facts. Easy access to firearms is what made it possible for the killings to happen.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

We should ask NRA to help save our kids Like this father of Newtown Survivor


What do you propose?

[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 5 years ago

Human beings are simply violent, there is no true solution. A simple solution to gun violence is obvious, amend the constitution, get rid of the guns. I know too many oppose that, so we must live with these occasional acts of madness and the ongoing gun violence in our cities.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

unacceptable. Sorry. We do NOT "have to live with these occasional acts of madness". We may NOT give up. We must act. And we must act now!

Be strong, do not give up. We need you. Together there is nothing the people can't accomplish.

[-] 1 points by MsStacy (1035) 5 years ago

It isn't matter of giving up. Some things are part of the human condition whether we are willing to accept them or not. There are things we can do to improve our chances in this world, but it requires a consensus we can't always get. As long as there are guns available there will be people willing to violate the law to get them and use them. There is little chance to actually repeal the Second Amendment and anything leaving guns in the hands of people will result in murders sooner or later.

It may not matter, without guns the method would change but not the level of violence. I see madness and occasional acts of extreme violence as things that will always be with us they are part of human nature. You may not wish to accept them, but I see human violence as inevitable as a hurricane or earthquake.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

You are mistaken. While I agree there will always be some violence we CAN lower the frequentsy and level.

And I would submit that human goodness is also natural and as inevitable as the sunrise.

Be confident, Do not submit to the extreme violence of the current day. It can improve ifwe get enough people to commit to reasonable change.

If we prevent too many people from giving up.

[-] -1 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 5 years ago

While gun sales are ONCE AGAIN Spiking out of PARANOIA, NRA and some RepubliCon bastards are capitulating to overwhelming reality!!!

OMG!!!!!!!! do you see?

Public attention WORKS!!!!!

[-] -1 points by 3roundmagsonly (-63) 5 years ago

Are you for prohibition of alcohol, too. Alcohol causes more death and destruction than guns, by a long shot.

I would be for strict gun control and a new prohibtion on alcohol and all recreational drugs.

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Alcohol and drugs didn't kill those kids. Easy access to firearms is what made the killing possible.

[-] -1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 5 years ago

Occupy will probably try to get to the root causes of what happened yesterday but there's no reason to hide from the gun control debate which may finally come. The first problem is defining what "semi-automatic" means exactly. There is some dissagreement on this.

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

What definition would you advocate?

[-] -1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 5 years ago

A typical 6-shooter may not be considered to be 'semi-automatic'. They have limitations because after 6 shots you have to reload. Still, somone can bring along 2-3 revolvers and that's 12-18 shots. Throw in shotgun and that's 20. In our culture we're making it too easy for anyone, including people who can't shoot worth a damn to do a lot of damage. We can argue all we want about what the problem is-guns or people but it's both.

[-] -1 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 5 years ago

Posted by Martha Rosenberg at 10:29 am

December 14, 2012

Merry Christmas From the Gun Lobby

Once again, a nutter has cut down innocent people thanks to the easy availability of firearms and the Wild West the gun lobby has created. In a week, the shock at more carnage will be supplanted by gun lobby shills assuring the public that the occasional shooter in a movie theater, mall or school is the price we pay for a "free society" and our "gun rights." And the "violence wouldn't have happened" if the moviegoers, shoppers and students had just been armed themselves....

No carnage seems to jolt people out of their NRA trance. Christmas shoppers gunned down? TSA agent mowed down at the Cleveland Hopkins Airport by her husband who then kills himself? Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher shoots his girlfriend in front of his own mother and drives to Arrowhead Stadium to shoot himself in front of team officials? These things happen!

33 dead at Virginia Tech? 70 gunned down at Batman movie? Arizona Congressperson Gabby Giffords and Kirkwood, Missouri mayor, public works director and council members shot? It's the price we pay for our "right" to own rapid fire weapons and arsenals. Murder/suicides are happening so regularly, no one even asks anymore, "The gunman was carrying WHAT?"--or "The firearms dealer sold a weapon to WHO?"

Of course the gun lobby says the "bad guys" will get firearms regardless of laws--which is why we need to be armed. But most mass shooters are legal gun owners who sail through background checks.

Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech killer, Stephen Phillip Kazmierczak, the Northern Illinois University killer, Sulejman Talovic, the Salt Lake City's Trolley Square mall shooter and Vincent J. Dortch, the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard shooter were all legal gun owners. Talovic was a Bosnian immigrant, legally required to show a second piece of identification, but bought the murder weapon at Sportsman's Fastcash, a pawnshop chain in Utah, with just one ID, say investigators.

Jiverly Voong, who killed 13 in Binghamton, NY and Richard Poplawski, who killed three Pittsburgh police officers, both in 2009, were legal gun owners. So was Bruce Pardo, one of two shooters dressed as Santa Claus is recent years, who bought at least five firearms within five months from a single weapons dealer before killing nine on Christmas Eve in Covina, CA.

Latina Williams, the Louisiana Technical College killer who was living in her car, paranoid and delusional and giving her possessions away in suicidal gestures, walked right into a New Orleans pawn shop and bought a .357 revolver and a box of ammunition the day before the shootings. Hey, she had rights. Jennifer Sanmarco, the Goleta postal facility killer was also a legal gun owner. So were Terry Ratzmann, the Milwaukee church service killer, Chai Vang the Wisconsin hunter killer and Bart Ross, who killed a Chicago Federal judge's husband and mother. Is there anyone who can't buy a firearm?

Still, the gun lobby is not satisfied. Gun laws are still too restrictive, especially in Illinois. On the same day Christmas shopping was interrupted by a gunman at an Oregon mall, the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals bowed to the lobby and said Illinois' ban on carrying a concealed weapon in public is unconstitutional. Illinois is the only state to ban conceal and carry. Make that was. END

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

I think the momentum is there to beat the NRA in this battle.

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 5 years ago

It seems like the Gun Rampages could not possibly get worse than this particular case.In fact,they WILL get worse-I am tempted to describe the next level of depravity,but I don't want to give anybody any Bright Ideas.No matter how bad these gun attacks get,gunowners will not agree to ANY restrictions on guns and there will be none.People out there know that people like the Koch brothers are controlling the government and they are scared of those people.Why shouldn't they be?There's nothing they won't do...they have so much money they can produce any effect,accomplish any aim.The kind of power Oligarchs have now is without limits,producing Creatures that bear little resemblance to Human Beings.

[-] 0 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

It's time to go after the NRA with more nonviolent direct action of all types. And it's time to demand our president and congressional representatives and state reps take sensible steps to push back against the gun lobby too. It's time.

[-] 0 points by Gillian (1842) 5 years ago

YES indeed. It's long overdue. I'm 51 years old and I can remember my mother telling me as a child that Britain was such a much safer place because they were not allowed to have guns and that even the police didn't use them. All these years have passed and I've watched my country deteriorate into more and more violence in almost every facet of our lives.

[-] 3 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Great point :)

[-] 0 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 5 years ago

Guns are too easy and too final, Britain has it right!

[-] -1 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 5 years ago

If all the Vics were Billionaires, we wouldn't have to do a single god damn thing!!

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Perhaps you're right :)

[-] 0 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 5 years ago

I am.

Name one problem that menaces the wealthy that we don't accommodate so they don't have to experience it??? Taxes???

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

I never thought of it that way.Great point. A little bit like the situation with abortion. If men could get pregnant then. . . :)

[-] 0 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 5 years ago

U got it!

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

It's a novel way of looking at it. To protect yourself, just become a billionaire. Problem solved.

[-] 0 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 5 years ago

Try and find a billionaire in the "shot dead!"

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

It seems that being a billionaire is a great plan!! The shocking thing is that those who push severely conservative agenda pretty much say that's the solution. Strange but true. Their plan is "maybe you might be rich someday so protect the rich with low taxes etc."

[-] 0 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 5 years ago

Just as Dracula vampires need Renfield codependent sidekicks; the 1% has their GOP zombies.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Ha! :)

[-] 0 points by WSmith (2698) from Cornelius, OR 5 years ago

Word to your mother!

[-] -2 points by ivyquinn (167) 5 years ago

"I'm working on gun control under the radar" Barack Obama, 2011

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Are you saying we should be hopeful as a result of this quote or pissed?

[-] 0 points by ivyquinn (167) 5 years ago

I'm saying that he has opposed gun rights while propogating gun running projects. I can't and won't trust him.

We need true gun control.