Active Shooting in San Bernardino health clinic.

So let's move on from the liberal propaganda and talk about the real issue, homegrown terrorism.

Those of you are are for an amendment to the constition in regards to gun control should logically also be for an amendment to the constitution in regards to privacy. You're never going to actually fix the issue of gun violence in this society without domestically spying on pretty much every US citizen. Is the death of Americans really worth the right to own a gun or live a private life? So my feeling is that we need to repeal the 2nd and 4th amendments. Take as many guns away as possible from law abiding citizens and then to prevent non law abiding citizens from obtaining black market weapons and using them we most make use of a powerful domesting intelligence gathering system. That way we can prevent things like this from happening again.

If we do those things then we won't have the need for conservatives who have been begging for Obama to do more about ISIS to kindly deliver condolonces to the grieving.

Or maybe there's a middle ground. A mental healthcare bill with bipartisan support that was rejected by democrats. Maybe let's put that back up for a vote and see if that will help. Gun control laws that actually target those most likely to commit mass murders rather than punishing law abiding gun holders. Gun control laws and police strategies that target inner city drug and gang violence. Whoops sorry about that last sentence. Even though it is true that most gun crime occurs in inner cities, I should never actually state that because it means I'm a racist to liberal dullards.
 
Well we can watch every Muzzie that walk the streets for a start and then start going into the inner cities and buy the weapons back from gangs, don't know if that is going to work. The only AK-47's left were sold before the law to ban them came in affect plus they are not allowed in the United States, so Mexico gangs are making a killing off selling them illegally.

The libs will not allow Mental Health Care laws aka Hippa to change because it is private. Maybe Weso is right, we need a police state, but our idiot in charge and the Dummicrats do not want it because it is not politically correct.

The problem is going to get worse but Dummicrats and NRA is not going allow it to get better.
 
1) who is advocating for a constitutional amendment ?

2) mental health - shmental health --

3) The Democrats have already passed a mental health bill. (R) has voted over 50 times to repeal

4) Ah, "politically correct "

5) Black on /black crime. How's bout husband on wife crime. Or poker player vs poker player crime or road rage vs road rage crme.
None of those things have anything to do with what happened yesterday or last week or Sandy Hook or Aurora or -- or -- or --

6)
 
sturg33 said:
These incidents will be used to strip away every right we once had. First it was terrorism, now it will be domestic terrorism. We will soon be in a fascist state, if we aren't already.
Click to expand...

I shudder to think you are right. I'm in my 60s, so the clock will likely run out on me before the police state fully takes hold, but my heart goes out to younger Americans of all stripes.
 
People keep advocating for tougher gun control, and yet most of these shootings keep happening in states with some of the strictest gun laws in America (Cali gun laws are in fact the most strict in the country). Strange how that works.
 
The Don said:
The NRA would never go for any of the stuff you listed weso even the ones that do make sense.
Click to expand...

They have though just recently supported a bill that would keep the guns out of the hands of mentally disturbed individuals. The democrats rejected the bill, and as it turns out it very well may have prevented recent mass shootings. The NRA doesn't go far enough, but the dems go too far. There is a reasonable middle ground that does exist. But to truly end gun violence you have to increase police presence in the inner cities. Ironically, democrats who want to end gun violence want to decrease the very thing that will most prevent gun violence.
 
goldfly said:
the list was so secret

it is known about

91% of people on the terrorist watch list that went to go buy a gun here, did so successfully since the creation of the list btw
Click to expand...

The list is not secret, who is on the list is secret and changes daily. You can be on the terrorist watch list without having any affiliation with known terrorist groups. You can be on the list if the FBI thinks you might have come in contact with a known terrorist group. Apparently 40% of the list is just people that "may" know someone affiliated with a terrorist group.

Apparently there are 2,000 people on the "watch list" that have purchased guns and none (reportedly) have used a gun in a crime.

"While some people on “no-fly” lists are there because they are suspected of terrorist activity, you can also get added because you are a suspect in a criminal case, made controversial statements or tweets unrelated to terrorism, are the victim of a clerical error, or refused to become a government informant."
 
MrShwag said:
I could see similar trainings become more widespread with the volatile nature in which society has arrived at .
Click to expand...

Might as well start training kids in elementary school; more useful than fire drills.
 
Carp said:
People keep advocating for tougher gun control, and yet most of these shootings keep happening in states with some of the strictest gun laws in America (Cali gun laws are in fact the most strict in the country). Strange how that works.
Click to expand...

Could be apples-and-oranges to some extent. We don't know if the guns are being purchased in the states with the tighter controls. Not saying they aren't, but we need more information here.
 
Hawk said:
No comment here, just reposting.

HbpjeGm.jpg
Click to expand...

Juvenile.

Link

"I could hardly believe the front page of the New York Daily News Thursday. Reflecting on the horrific shooting in San Bernardino, the paper posted tweets of prayer for the victims from Republican presidential candidates with the massive headline, “God Won’t Fix This.” I’m hard-pressed to think of a more cynical and exploitative headline at a time of national mourning.

The exaggerating tabloid, though, was simply picking up on the buzz of its new media cousins, as Twitter and Facebook were filled with similar sentiments all day. Don’t just pray, a typical post would lecture, but instead let’s do something about gun violence. Whatever one thinks about God or prayer or, for that matter, gun control, this is a bad development for a society already fractured in too many ways.

On the one hand, I tried to give the benefit of the doubt to the prayer cynics. After all, politicians posting to pray is hardly the same thing as prayer meetings.

I’ve been exasperated by the way politicians have used prayer, too. Some campaign “benedictions” are basically campaign commercials containing everything but “I’m John Smith, and I approved this message” at the end.

But those of us who watched others mock politicians who called for prayer also felt as though prayer was an unnecessary target along the way. For most people who are religious, prayer is more than just another way of saying “Message: I care.”

The vicious back-and-forth on social media did more than simply question the sincerity of politicians’ prayer messages. The debate threatened to communicate that prayer accomplishes nothing. What we need is to do something about the situation in San Bernardino.

These commenters obviously didn’t refer to the horrifying situation playing out on their television screens, in and of itself. Civilians couldn’t leave their hometowns and rush to the scene of the crime. In most cases, what they meant was adopt a particular political program, usually to restrict access to guns.

I have no objection to people making the case for tightened gun control — even if I don’t agree with all their proposed solutions. Let’s have that debate.

What we don’t have in this country is a debate over whether shooting the innocent is right or wrong. We agree on that. Where we disagree is whether specific pieces of legislation will stop these sorts of incidents, typically involving severely mentally deranged people.

We have a debate over what latitude the Bill of Rights gives us to restrict gun ownership from the law-abiding. Still, that’s a debate worth having.

The “prayer-shaming” on social media, however, is not really about that debate at all. No one was suggesting that Congress go into session while the criminals were on the run and pass an omnibus gun bill. What most meant by “do something” was to, well, express an opinion about gun control on Twitter.

Ironically, enough, the “Don’t Just Pray There, Do Something” meme will actually keep things from happening. After all, some of our biggest obstacles to policy solutions of any kind is an ideologically fractured populace where virtually every issue is a test of political purity.

If you shame away the most human aspects of public life — such as the call to pray for one another — you will find this situation worsening, not getting better. After all, we learn to listen to one another, and even work together, because we see one another as fellow humans, fellow citizens, as people of goodwill, not just as avatars to be warred against on a screen.

Hashtag activism has become, in many ways, our new secularized form of praying. The expressing of one’s opinion is a way to say, “I’m the sort of person who wants to restrict guns” or “I’m the sort of person who wants to racially profile Muslims” or “I’m the sort of person who wants more resources for police.”

But let’s be clear: that’s not “doing something.” It is one more indication that politics has become more than just politics. It’s become a kind of secularized religion — with its own sets of orthodoxies, denominational distinctives, and rigorous forms of excommunication (the “block” button on Twitter).

It shouldn’t be this way. The first response to a word of our fellow citizens in peril should be a human response of empathy. For religious people, that means a call to pray for them, and to encourage others of like mind to do so.

For non-religious people, that means perhaps holding your loved ones tightly and realizing your, for lack of a better word, blessings. It shouldn’t mean an immediate search for who is to blame for holding the wrong opinions.

For religious people, of all sorts, prayer is doing something. We do believe that God can intervene, to comfort the hurting and even to energize ourselves and others for right action. For those who don’t believe in the power of prayer, the last thing any of us should want is social pressure to pretend to pray. What we can expect, though, is for neighbors to express in what ever ways they have, “We love one another, and we hurt for one another.”

When that becomes just another culture war battlefield, we’ve lost more than a set of policy proposals. We’ve lost the social cohesion we need to do anything. And social media outrage can’t fix that."
 
Bedell, I get what Moore is saying. Everybody is shaming everyone else and that's problematic. Prayer is today's target. The need to bomb ISIS back to the Stone Age was last week's. I'm pretty cynical by nature, so take everything I say/write with a grain of salt, but I've always found this cartoon pretty much on point when it comes to people's approach to prayer.

Bob.JPG


Until the call to prayer is accompanied by the realization that perhaps prayer's most valuable element may be toward inspiring one's self to take action, it comes off as empty. Who knows what God does, but those who offer prayers when confronted why things didn't improve say "The Lord works in mysterious ways." The entire cosmos is mysterious as is a lot of life on terra firma. But the constant call for prayer comes off as a missive to ignore one'e public responsibility as opposed to saying "Here I am Lord."
 
This particular individual bought two handguns legally... he did not buy the rifles.

He had no criminal record at all.
 
Sure, no debate on hypocritical or trite or empty calls to prayer. But i don't assume that all such are that. Nor will I assume that a person who prays believes that is all he should do.

And the new constant prayer-shaming and hashtag activism can come off as a self-righteous missive to ignore one's public responsibility as well....
 
BedellBrave said:
Surprised there are no more comments on this thread. Was away for a couple of days and expected much more here.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much of it is because most reasonable people have come to the conclusion that there really isn't a good "one size fits all" type of solution. Sure, Dems tend to think some form of "gun control" is the answer but I have never thought guns could be controlled, although we could do a better job of it than what we do now. Repubs tend to say the usual NRA response, more mental health screenings, better background checks, which I do think would help somewhat, but I think either/both of these will make that much of a difference either. Add to it how many Repubs want that NRA money with an election year coming up and some have already voted against the very expanded background/mental health checks they act like they favor, especially in certain settings like gun shows.

I think the only things that can really help are better overall intelligence (which I think is a joke considering how much actual intelligence our government has and an extremely exaggerated police presence on the streets, which we don't have the money for, and I wonder if a much larger and more heavily armed police presence might fix, or at least help one problem and create several worse problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top