quote: Percy And so just like driving in the snow you must keep your wits about you as go about your daily business, ever vigilant for the crazy guy, or the fellow employee with the messy divorce, or the person in retail with the vicious manager, or the angry guy who just got fired, or the jihadist wannabe. The more you weaken our gun laws the more possible terrible events become.
So look ahead, look left, look right, then look behind you, because you never know where they'll be coming from. This is how you should drive in the snow, but is this how anyone wants to live their lives?
Nobody is talking about banning guns. Rifles can be obtained by anybody and I'm not sure if there are any bans anywhere in USA.
I don't care whether guns are banned or not (I suppose I am disturbed if 400,000 coyotes are shot every year but it does no good to worry about it because it will never stop) because animals will always be killed (by darts or whatever) in the millions (or billions), and people will always be killed in the (low) thousands by homicides.
The gun issue involves people submitting medical records into a database (which contributes to stigmatization) and THAT I do have a problem with. This gun-control issue isn't a benign issue. It also gets to the issue of empowering psychiatrists (the garbage-pale of fraudulent medicine) even further, when they have a great track record of traumatizing children for life by forcing them on meds as early as 9 or 10 (actually as early as 2!)
I wish it was just about guns, as low-information voters seem to think. This is one issue where the pro-gun voters seem better informed on the complexities of the issue. The NRA supports "medical background checks", and a pro-gun splinter group by Larry Pratt was formed called something like "Concerned Gun Owners For America" and it got 2 million members by 2014.In the 2014 GOP primary, they ran ads against the then Republican Majority leader Eric Cantor of Culpeper, Virginia for (this isn't an exact quote) "voting for legislation which forced vets, who seek mental help, to loose their rights to own their gun". Cantor was defeated and I think it was a historic first for a Majority Leader to loose in the primary.
I still wonder if the rifles won't be owned or easy to obtain. They are everywhere.
Re: Let's start (once more) with 4 simple ideas ...
quote: ) make background checks universal to reduce availability to the insane, people with a criminal record or on the terrorist list.
You have no clue what "insane" means because you haven't read any pieces of legislation. It is just a soundbite. As insidious of a soundbite as they come too.
And you might be on the terrorist list for all you know. 9/11 hero Willy Rodriguez saved 15 lives that day, and he found himself on the terror watch list when he attempted to board a plane. (the theory is that he was suspected of being a 9/11 Truther) (I'm not sure if he is a Truther btw
As for the "criminal record" part, who isn't a criminal in the USA? Most have used drugs (like pot), and some even get caught. Do drug users count? Or only if they were caught? What 25 year old males in Maryland who slept with the (perfectly) legal (in MD) 16 year old girlfriend? But federal law says it was illegal to even view nude 16 year olds. Should they register as sex offenders for violating federal law? I know of a case in Maryland (this was a former roommate) where a 30 year old guy slept with a 16 year old (he went out with her for many months till she was 17), and her father got pretty mad when he found out. My friend had to go before a judge. The Judge started the trial by asking the then 17 year old girl, "was it consensual". She simply said "yes" and the Judge immediately said "Case dismissed".
Is the judge a party to a "federal sex crime"? Should he loose his gun rights and register as a "sex offender"?
At least a 2-1 ratio. Around 30,000 per year verses 15,000.
Lets obsess over automotive accidents then.
I worry about staph infections ALOT (gotten them in multiple places). Those kill 23,000 people in the U.S. per year and God help us if there is no last line antibiotic to use. China has seen a monumental increase in anti-biotic resistant bacteria.
"Culture war" bias is driving this issue. Not the evidence.
If we actually have a real ban on guns (which isn't on any agenda in the real world of American politics), including total 100% confiscation, then how many suicides will go down according to the studies?
Re: Why dont we just ban rifles and get it over with.
Straggler "Putting all that together gives a figure of between 10,500 and 13,500 reduction in suicides per year.
'back of a fag packet' calculation but I'm not sure how else this could be estimated. Happy to see a better method of estimation."
NoNukes That sounds about right. And according to the vacuous reasoning being proposed here, 10,000 people aren't worth worrying since about smoking, for example, killed 40 times more people in this country. Similarly why worry about 59,000 Americans dying in the Vietnam war over a couple of decades or so, or a few deaths per year from HIV, etc. Why do we even have seat belts or helmet laws? According to one opinion, even having a debate about such stuff is immoral.
I don't know where to start.
First nobody is talking about banning all guns - not even close. (so much for stopping these 10,000-14,000 suicides)
2nd, allowing people to have guns isn't an issue of the state forcing anything on anybody.
I blame the suicides and mass shootings (as well as the post 1980/1990s obesity epidemic among the poor) on prescription psychotropic drugs and many other factors. I just started a thread on SSRIs and their effect but that is just the tip of the iceberg.
My biggest objection to "gun control" is that it includes the issue of forcing children on psychotropic drugs.
The issue of guns is just one tiny little corner of a much broader picture. Straggler. Is you reasoning incorrect? Is your data incorrect? I can be 100% correct but it mostly misses out on hundreds of points.
This reminds me of a debate I saw between Kent Hovind and a Professor. The Ph D professor responded to Hovinds claim, that water causes the geologic strata, by sayings that "just because something is true in one part of the universe doesn't mean is applies to everything" or something like that. Gun control advocates remind me of creationists.
quote: Natural News By Peter Breggin, Psychiatrist, Author March 20, 2013
There have been recent calls for a national Mental Health Registry, and then additional calls to link such a registry to gun licensing. In the dreadful wake of Newtown, both the left and the right and the current US federal administration are demanding that we tighten mental health statutes to make it easier and even mandatory for health care providers including psychiatrists and psychotherapists to incarcerate people on suspicion of perpetrating violence.
In a recent blog, I evaluated all the ways psychiatry and individual psychiatrists already have too much authority to lock up American citizens. I’ve pointed out how ineffective that power has proven in preventing violence.
Indeed, as many are now learning, psychiatric drugs can cause violence and have contributed to school shootings and other mayhem. Here I want to remind and to warn that psychiatry has been and continues to be the cause of some of the greatest abuses in the Western World. In the aftermath of the school shootings, psychiatry should not be allowed to garner even more power.
Consider as a start the several-hundred year history of the state mental hospital system. Given the power to lock up people at their own discretion, psychiatrists “put away” untold millions of people over several hundred years in the Western World. In its heyday in the 1930s, by turning innumerable state hospital patients into guinea pigs, psychiatry invented and practiced lobotomy, insulin coma shock, and electroshock. Despite overwhelming evidence for its damaging effects, electroshock continues to flourish and to be pushed by advocates, probably afflicting several hundreds of thousand patients each year in the US.
MORE (and with hyperlinks)
I wish Bregin would talk about how he ran a fascist from Spain, Jose Delgado, out of the country in the early 70s. Delgado took advantage of the racist climate in the country, and was influential in teaching professors at Harvard, Yale, and other universities the benefits of removing a walnut size piece of brain from patients. They were so political that they testified to congress that they could "cure" ghetto rioters.
Bregin has to testify in courtrooms today to keep the state from forcing children to be head-shocked with enough electricity that if it were the heart, it would be stopped. They say ECT treatment is much better than it was in the 70s. So they say.
Perhaps the psychiatric system is causing more suicides by putting children through trauma. Perhaps the prison system causes trauma.
Again, nobody is talking about banning guns. Guns aren't going away under any proposal. Lets look at the actual issues please.
President Obama’s “New Executive Actions to Reduce Gun Violence” sound pretty good on a superficial reading, and some may indeed be helpful.
For example, keep guns out of the wrong hands. Well, gee whiz — who wants them in the wrong hands? Certainly not legitimate gun owners.
What are the troublesome proposals? Well, is it really necessary to become a federally licensed gun dealer for the occasional sale of a couple of guns? I’ve sold guns to friends, my police chief and a couple of relatives during the past 10 years. Should I have to obtain a license? Where is the president’s proposal to reduce the theft of 500,000 guns a year? Maybe he forgot about the biggest source of crime guns: Criminals steal them! .... Proposing an extra $500 million for mental health care is a great idea, but surely the president knew our mental health system was broken back in his first term. What troubles me is having federal officials “remove unnecessary legal barriers” that prevent states from reporting on people’s mental health. If we want people to seek counseling, we had better protect doctor-patient confidentiality. Otherwise, who would seek help? MORE from link
Feldman worked with Clinton in the 1990s (they had a rose garden signing ceremony in 97, I think)
quote: Former gun lobbyist and National Rifle Association (NRA) insider Richard Feldman explains how he came to believe that the NRA is — as he writes — a "cynical, mercenary political cult."
Feldman's new book, Ricochet: Confessions of a Gun Lobbyist, sheds light on the inside workings of America's powerful gun lobby.
Feldman writes that the NRA is "obsessed with wielding power while relentlessly squeezing contributions from its members, objectives that overshadow protecting Constitutional liberties." MUCH MORE IN LINK
But the January 7 USA TODAY has an article titled "Obama shows restraint on guns" with subtitle "There were no executive orders" by Gregory Korte.
quote: ...only a presidential memorandum asking federal agencies to study smart gun technology. He proposed only one new regulation, a Social Security Administration rule that would allow it to share lists of people on disability with the national background check system. And the centerpiece of the initiative was the issue of a guidance document on which gun sales require a Federal Firearms License - and therefore subject to a criminal background check. That document mostly restates existing case law and breaks no new legal ground.
I do indeed object btw. And I have been following the details (a poster above seemed to indicate that critics were ignoring the specific Obama actions) as my posts should indicate.
Other issues covered here included claims of murder rates dropping with more gun control (mostly claims that cherry picked state anti-gun legislation and positive drops in crime after)
The federal Assault Weapons ban was lifted in early 2004. The murder rate was about 16,500 during the last full year of the ban (2003). The murder rate fell down to about 14,000 for 2014.
"Awfully silent here about Obama's Executive Order"
quote: Chastened by immigration, Obama shows restraint on guns By Gregory Korte,USA Today
WASHINGTON — As executive actions go, President Obama's effort to clamp down on illegal gun sales was relatively restrained.
The actions contained no executive orders, the best known and most formal exercise of unilateral presidential authority — only a presidential memorandum asking federal agencies to study smart gun technology. He proposed only one new regulation, a Social Security Administration rule that would allow it to share lists of people on disability with the national background check system.
And the centerpiece of the initiative was the issuing of a guidance document on which gun sales require a Federal Firearms License — and therefore subject to a criminal background check. That document mostly restates existing case law and breaks no new legal ground.
For all the predictions of executive orders exceeding the president's authority, Obama's actions generally colored within the lines.
"There is nothing here that anyone could say in good faith even pushes at the boundaries of executive authority," said Chelsea Parsons, the vice president of gun policy at the Center for American Progress, a think tank and liberal advocacy group with close ties to the Obama White House. She sees the actions as part of an incremental approach that Obama or future presidents can build on. Republicans who had complained of executive overreach were underwhelmed. "Ultimately, this executive ‘guidance’ is only a weak gesture —a shell of what the president actually wants," said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California. Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin promised "vigilant oversight" but said Obama's actions were ultimately a "distraction."
The National Rifle Association said the Obama guidance was "ripe for abuse" and promised to defend gun owners from harassment. But an immediate lawsuit is unlikely because there are few actual rules to challenge.
I think I can work it into my SSRI thread (it is military research that is related to SSRIs but uses frequencies instead). It's various paragraphs from a book (written by a Ph D), and I have it on a zip drive. It really is interesting. Full of references from mainstream respected sources and journals.
Considering the gun obsession here, I thought I would tie it into the gun issue. That would have been a bad idea. It would have been hard to connect and people might have misunderstood me.
quote: LamarkNewAge My biggest objection to "gun control" is that it includes the issue of forcing children on psychotropic drugs.
Straggler Huh? I assume you have data to back this claim up? International comparisons showing a link between gun control laws and the number of children on psychotic drugs in different nations, for example?