What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

USA Shootings (2 Viewers)

Stealthycat said:
bump stocks 
Click to expand...
Nope.   The NRA supported an ATF review of the current rule, but then clarified that it was opposing a ban.

Some have used our October 2017 statement to claim that NRA supports ATF’s final rule, but as NRA-ILA’s Executive Director Chris Cox noted only days after our statement was issued, “We don’t believe that bans have ever worked on anything.”
Click to expand...

 
Stealthycat said:
I think its all in the way each law is written ... if done right, I think the NRA would support. 

If I make a phone call and report someone I'm pissed at because their kid was mean to mine in school ... cops show and take all that guy's guns for 1 year and it costs him thousands in legal fee's .... that's wrong and shouldn't be allowed.

If I make a phone call and report someone because they posted about a mass shooting they're planning, and I know they've had issues in the past with violence, they're from unstable home, always into trouble, drugs ... they have guns ..... that is much more validating in authorities intervening and seeing what's up
Click to expand...
They haven’t supported a single red flag law.  They can say they support them all they want; when it comes to action, they do not.

 
Dedfin said:
That filthy org should be gutted.
Click to expand...
Why?

Something, possibly more powerful, may replace them. If you're anti gun, you should not push for the complete demise of the NRA. Instead, you should push for an overhaul on how all lobbying controls our society. Put anti gun lobbyist and the NRA on the same level. Neither has more power than the other. At that point, the representation of the people becomes the deciding factor.

 
Henry Ford said:
Can you name a law instituting a gun regulation in the last decade that the NRA supported?
Click to expand...
So to pass regulations on guns, often we seek for compromise.  The issue we have had in the past is that when the gun rights groups make a compromise, the compromise becomes the target in a couple years.  When the Brady bill was passed gun groups asked for a compromise to exclude private sales from background checks.  Fast forward to today and now we are targeting the gun show loop hole.  

When negotiating it is important to look at the deal from both sides.  Why should supporters give any ground on at all?  Any regulations passed today are just stepping stones to additional regulation in the future.  I assume that the end goal of the gun control group is to remove all guns or at least everything but revolvers and bolt actions.  If that is the goal then I will oppose every step towards that.

 
abbottjamesr said:
So to pass regulations on guns, often we seek for compromise.  The issue we have had in the past is that when the gun rights groups make a compromise, the compromise becomes the target in a couple years.  When the Brady bill was passed gun groups asked for a compromise to exclude private sales from background checks.  Fast forward to today and now we are targeting the gun show loop hole.  

When negotiating it is important to look at the deal from both sides.  Why should supporters give any ground on at all?  Any regulations passed today are just stepping stones to additional regulation in the future.  I assume that the end goal of the gun control group is to remove all guns or at least everything but revolvers and bolt actions.  If that is the goal then I will oppose every step towards that.
Click to expand...
Can you give me an example of a regulation the NRA supported that was used as a stepping stone like you’re talking about? The Brady Bill was 26 years ago.  Is that the one you mean?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stealthycat said:
nobody ever said that did they? 

you avoided the question ............ what laws would have stopped this guy from corn raking his wife to death ? why didn't the police stop him?

you make it to Arkansas fish Crooked Creek, some of the best smallmouth kayak fishing in the south IMO

how many examples of people in kayak's using their firearms illegally? any?   they are pretty much zero danger to you, like all concealed weapons owners. Sure, there will be an incidents rarely, there always is ... but 99.99% of the time, never an issue. remember yesterday 15-20 million people or more carried in public .......... and no problems with 99.99% of them or more
Click to expand...
The only thing that was going to stop that guy from killing his wife was if the police could stop him ahead of time or if she left him a long time ago.  The man is psychotic. 

I would love to fish there.  I'm up for any great bass fishing locations.

I don't know of any examples of people in their kayaks using them illegally but they sure like to brag about having them and how they would use them to threaten others.  I know it's mostly talk but it really makes them feel tough.  In three weeks I'm fishing a huge tourney in Shreveport and many of the guys will be carrying for protection from gators and snakes.  Can't say I blame them there.  I'd be lying if I didn't have some concerns about one of them accidentally shooting themselves or going off on another fisherman because they are in "their spot."  It's unlikely to happen but some people can't be trusted.

 
@abbottjamesr

I ask that because saying Brady was just a stepping stone is kind of odd.  The most restrictive part of the Brady Bill (the waiting period) and the lack of computerization in the country was why there was no provision for private sales.  You couldn’t really do that then. The waiting period expired in 1998. Everything is computerized.  It’s suddenly practical.  

 
Hawkeye21 said:
The only thing that was going to stop that guy from killing his wife was if the police could stop him ahead of time or if she left him a long time ago.  The man is psychotic. 

I would love to fish there.  I'm up for any great bass fishing locations.

I don't know of any examples of people in their kayaks using them illegally but they sure like to brag about having them and how they would use them to threaten others.  I know it's mostly talk but it really makes them feel tough.  In three weeks I'm fishing a huge tourney in Shreveport and many of the guys will be carrying for protection from gators and snakes.  Can't say I blame them there.  I'd be lying if I didn't have some concerns about one of them accidentally shooting themselves or going off on another fisherman because they are in "their spot."  It's unlikely to happen but some people can't be trusted.
Click to expand...
she could have protected herself Hawkeye21 ... at least tried

its not the premier river/stream in North America ... but its a good one :)

people who carry don't need to brag and if they threaten others that's a violation of the law. You are more likely to be killed on the highway in a car than a gun that's being carried on a kayak - far more likely 

 
Stealthycat said:
she could have protected herself Hawkeye21 ... at least tried

its not the premier river/stream in North America ... but its a good one :)

people who carry don't need to brag and if they threaten others that's a violation of the law. You are more likely to be killed on the highway in a car than a gun that's being carried on a kayak - far more likely 
Click to expand...
No one needs to brag yet people do it all the time.  Numerous times I'll read that a person doesn't need to worry about something because they carry and they'll take care of it.  There's no way you haven't heard someone act tough because they carry, it's part of the ego.  It's really not all that different from the guys who drive jacked up trucks or expensive sports cars.  It's not true for everyone but there is certainly an ego issue with many of them.

 
Henry Ford said:
Can you give me an example of a regulation the NRA supported that was used as a stepping stone like you’re talking about? The Brady Bill was 26 years ago.  Is that the one you mean?
Click to expand...
Pretty sure the NRA does not support any gun regulation (I don't know, I'm not a member).  They didn't seem to put up to much of a fuss over bump stocks, it didn't seem.

This maybe happens at the state level more often but the NFA is a good example.  The line of reasoning goes "We are only banning a certain aspect of the gun, say the mag size, stock type, handle type, length of gun, etc, but you can still own the gun.  So people go along with it because it doesn't seem that bad, we compromise.  Then next year its something else to go after.  Some tragic event happens and people say oh we need to ban some other random aspect of the gun so that they will be less dangerous.  This  process continues, but nothing is accomplished except making it difficult on law abiding citizens but not making anyone safer.

I personally agree with background checks, but it's just one more restriction in a sea of many actual and potentially forthcoming.

 
abbottjamesr said:
Pretty sure the NRA does not support any gun regulation (I don't know, I'm not a member).  They didn't seem to put up to much of a fuss over bump stocks, it didn't seem.

This maybe happens at the state level more often but the NFA is a good example.  The line of reasoning goes "We are only banning a certain aspect of the gun, say the mag size, stock type, handle type, length of gun, etc, but you can still own the gun.  So people go along with it because it doesn't seem that bad, we compromise.  Then next year its something else to go after.  Some tragic event happens and people say oh we need to ban some other random aspect of the gun so that they will be less dangerous.  This  process continues, but nothing is accomplished except making it difficult on law abiding citizens but not making anyone safer.

I personally agree with background checks, but it's just one more restriction in a sea of many actual and potentially forthcoming.
Click to expand...
The NRA used to support gun regulation. It practically wrote the entire National Firearms Act and the Gun Control Act.

They opposed banning bump stocks. And every other regulation this century. 

 
Henry Ford said:
The NRA used to support gun regulation. It practically wrote the entire National Firearms Act and the Gun Control Act.

They opposed banning bump stocks. And every other regulation this century. 
Click to expand...
I had to do some reading on the history of the NRA.  It does appear that for much of the 20th century they were avid supporters of gun control legislation including gun registries and waiting periods and did write much of the NFA and GCA.  Interesting history I didn't know about.  It's crazy how much they have changed in the last 20 years.

I personally think that the NRA has lost touch with reality.  I would much rather increase back ground checks and require training and licenses if we can stop banning certain guns, accessories and magazine capacities.  I do find the NFA to be kind of annoying, with the long waiting periods to get a tax stamp back and arbitrary definitions of a short barrel rifle, but if it is the price we pay then so be it I guess.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
abbottjamesr said:
I had to do some reading on the history of the NRA.  It does appear that for much of the 20th century they were avid supporters of gun control legislation including gun registries and waiting periods and did write much of the NFA and GCA.  Interesting history I didn't know about.  It's crazy how much they have changed in the last 20 years.
Click to expand...
40 years.  The entire organization and in some ways the direction of our country changed in 1977. 

 
abbottjamesr said:
 What happened in 1977?
Click to expand...
The Cincinnati Revolution.  

The organization was planning on building a giant recreational facility out west and moving its headquarters to Colorado.  But at the 1977 convention - 2 years after their lobbying organization was formed - a bunch of hardline Second Amendment activists took power.  Existing office holders were blamed for the Gun Control Act of 1968, and the organization decided that no compromise should ever be agreed to again. 

The guy who took over lobbying was Wayne LaPierre’s mentor.  Basically the same leadership throughline ever since. 

 
Henry Ford said:
The Cincinnati Revolution.  

The organization was planning on building a giant recreational facility out west and moving its headquarters to Colorado.  But at the 1977 convention - 2 years after their lobbying organization was formed - a bunch of hardline Second Amendment activists took power.  Existing office holders were blamed for the Gun Control Act of 1968, and the organization decided that no compromise should ever be agreed to again. 

The guy who took over lobbying was Wayne LaPierre’s mentor.  Basically the same leadership throughline ever since. 
Click to expand...
Interesting.  That seems consistent with their position today.  It's a hard subject for me because I personally go between there should be no compromise and maybe not everybody should be allowed to own a gun in today's world.  The world is a dangerous place and removing all guns from the masses is not a way to make it safer. 

 
abbottjamesr said:
Interesting.  That seems consistent with their position today.  It's a hard subject for me because I personally go between there should be no compromise and maybe not everybody should be allowed to own a gun in today's world.  The world is a dangerous place and removing all guns from the masses is not a way to make it safer. 
Click to expand...
I don’t personally know anyone trying to remove all guns. It’s never going to happen. 

 
Henry Ford said:
The Cincinnati Revolution.  

The organization was planning on building a giant recreational facility out west and moving its headquarters to Colorado.  But at the 1977 convention - 2 years after their lobbying organization was formed - a bunch of hardline Second Amendment activists took power.  Existing office holders were blamed for the Gun Control Act of 1968, and the organization decided that no compromise should ever be agreed to again. 

The guy who took over lobbying was Wayne LaPierre’s mentor.  Basically the same leadership throughline ever since. 
Click to expand...
Radiolab did a nice pod on evolution of the NRA here, including the Oakland Black Panthers/Bobby Seale/Mullford Act period and 129th NRA meeting in Cincinnati and how such a small number of people in the NRA overthrew the group.

HF probably knows everything in the pod, but @abbottjamesr as all Radiolab productions it's very well done and not too long. Give it a listen :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice said:
It has to be one or the other?
Click to expand...
Do you always answer a question with a question? Seems as though you are deflecting.

Here's a 40 year study on the alcohol use and firearm violence.

This is just how alcohol relates to firearm violence. When you factor in the deaths caused by dui's, domestic violence (where no firearm is involved, health issues, and deaths caused by over consumption, I'm still wondering why so many people give alcohol a pass.  

Alcohol abuse is a major predictor for gun crime

“One finding that really struck me was that when you threw alcohol and other kinds of criminal activity into the mix, alcohol remained a strong predictor but the other forms of criminal activity did not,” said Garen Wintemute, the director of the program. “Alcohol was a more important predictor of future violence than prior violence was.”
Click to expand...


While politicians and pundits have singled out mental health as a predictor of gun violence, a number of previous studies have linked alcohol consumption and criminality, especially when it comes to gun-related crimes. One 2013 paper found that 34 percent of gun homicide perpetrators had been drinking before they killed someone. Heavy alcohol consumption is also strongly linked with gun suicide and becoming a victim of gun violence.
Click to expand...

 
England is in a state of national emergency due to recent rise in knife attacks. 

Here? We don't have a gun problem, we blame alcohol and cars. Too many Americans love their guns more than human life. And it's gotten to the point where they don't even try to hide this.

 
KCitons said:
Do you always answer a question with a question? Seems as though you are deflecting.
Click to expand...
Not deflecting, just wondering why you phrased it as a one or the other question.  

I didn't see a pic of the people involved, but I would still lean on the gun side.  If the booze was still involved, but a gun wasn't, I don't think the death toll is where it was.  A gun makes it so much easier to harm a person and more likely to end in death than probably anything else that guy could have gotten to in the middle of that fight while he was hellbent on driving.  

This is also a reason I am for the legalization of weed.  I think all of us probably know an angry drunk.  Several of my friends were unbearable if they had hard liquor - tried to start fights, etc..   I have never known the equivalent person when solely smoking the reefer.  

 
KarmaPolice said:
Not deflecting, just wondering why you phrased it as a one or the other question.  

I didn't see a pic of the people involved, but I would still lean on the gun side.  If the booze was still involved, but a gun wasn't, I don't think the death toll is where it was.  A gun makes it so much easier to harm a person and more likely to end in death than probably anything else that guy could have gotten to in the middle of that fight while he was hellbent on driving.  

This is also a reason I am for the legalization of weed.  I think all of us probably know an angry drunk.  Several of my friends were unbearable if they had hard liquor - tried to start fights, etc..   I have never known the equivalent person when solely smoking the reefer.  
Click to expand...
Not sure what the bolded means? How does the way the person looks in a picture determine whether it was a gun issue or an alcohol issue?

We've had discussions about red flag laws. And discussions about prohibiting those with mental illnesses from owning firearms. Both came with concerns. I posted two articles that researched the link between alcohol and gun violence. We also already have laws around misuse of alcohol. It's easy to identify someone that has had past issues with alcohol. At a minimum, wouldn't it make sense to prohibit those offenders from owning firearms? If the stats are correct, we could decrease future violent crimes by doing so. I could go a step further and say we should ban alcohol, since one study showed that a significant percentage of people that committed murders, did so under the influence of alcohol. But, let's save that for a later conversation. Let's start with those that are past offenders and evaluate the outcome.

 
KCitons said:
Mississippi man kills wife and two friends who were trying to prevent him from driving drunk.

“These were all good friends having a nice time together,” Walker said in a statement released after Barnhill appeared in court on Monday. “Michael Barnhill, however, became drunk and belligerent during the course of the evening. The others discouraged his drunkenness, and he became angry and combative.”
Click to expand...
Do we blame the gun or the alcohol here?
Click to expand...


blame the person - had he used a knife would you blame the knife? had he used a rock blame the rock? had he ran her over with a car blame the car? 

sometimes people do evil things - this guy did an evil thing and that's really all there is to it as horrible as it is

 
Had he used a knife the people would probably not be dead. None of those other things are as fatal as guns in that context. Of course, you know this.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apple Jack said:
Had he used a knife the people would probably not be dead. None of those other things are as fatal as guns in that context. Of course, you know this.
Click to expand...
He still posts this junk after admitting that the weapons do matter and he couldn't defend his family as well with a rock, knife, or hammer. 

 
Stealthycat said:
blame the person - had he used a knife would you blame the knife? had he used a rock blame the rock? had he ran her over with a car blame the car? 

sometimes people do evil things - this guy did an evil thing and that's really all there is to it as horrible as it is
Click to expand...
I do blame the person. But more specifically the altered mental state of that person. 

 
KarmaPolice said:
Makes a difference if it's some Hulk of a dude vs a little guy if he tries this with a different weapon and how successful it would be.  Not so much when a gun is involved. 
Click to expand...
If he has a knife, or a baseball bat, or a purple dildo does the wife give him back his keys? Did you read the article?

“These were all good friends having a nice time together,” Walker said in a statement released after Barnhill appeared in court on Monday. “Michael Barnhill, however, became drunk and belligerent during the course of the evening. The others discouraged his drunkenness, and he became angry and combative.”
Click to expand...
Michael Barnhill got a pistol out of the truck, slapped a cigarette out of her hand and shot her in the chest, then fatally shot the party’s hosts
Click to expand...
We often wonder about the mental state of mass shooters. What would cause them to act in such a manner? In this case, we know a major factor was the alcohol. But, some here choose to ignore it. 

 
KCitons said:
I do blame the person. But more specifically the altered mental state of that person. 
Click to expand...
agreed

however, every weekend in the USA literally millions of people get hammered drunk ..... its exceptionally rare that a spouse gets a gun out and kills the significant other

this man had a lot of issues/problems, there is more to this than what's being reported I think but nobody will ever really know I imagine

 
Henry Ford said:
10% rise in gun ownership in a state is correlated with a 35% higher rate of mass shootings. 

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/433017-states-with-stricter-gun-control-regulations-have-fewer-mass
Click to expand...
"the percentage of suicides committed with a firearm was the best measure for estimating gun ownership by state"

really? and if that single assumption is wrong it would throw off everything wouldn't it? 

I didn't see anything in that study about the increase in drug use being a possible reason for "mass" shootings or criminal activity. Those absolutely need factored in as well. 

 
Stealthycat said:
"the percentage of suicides committed with a firearm was the best measure for estimating gun ownership by state"

really? and if that single assumption is wrong it would throw off everything wouldn't it? 

I didn't see anything in that study about the increase in drug use being a possible reason for "mass" shootings or criminal activity. Those absolutely need factored in as well. 
Click to expand...
Really.  That's not an assumption.  It's research.

Gun ownership is not directly surveyed across all 50 states each year in the US. A review of over 24 gun ownership indicators found that the percentage of suicides committed with a firearm was the best measure for estimating gun ownership by state.17 This has also been verified in several other studies across different regions,1819202122 in which the percentage of suicides committed with a firearm was shown to be highly correlated with the proportion of households reporting gun ownership (across 21 US states r=0.90,23 across nine census regions r=0.9324). Therefore, we chose to use the percentage of suicides committed with a firearm as a proxy measurement for gun ownership per state per year, which we obtained through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s online database, WONDER.25
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apple Jack said:
Don't know. Let's ask the medical examiner.
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, you're saying if he had a knife that those people wouldn't be dead? 

The guy had a gun in his truck. He drove to the party with his wife. If he wanted her dead when he was sober, he could have shot her on the way to the party, or at their own house, or right after getting to the party. Instead, he shot her (and the hosting couple) after he became drunk. To say the cause is the gun and not the alcohol is being ridiculous. 

 
KCitons said:
Just to be clear, you're saying if he had a knife that those people wouldn't be dead? 

The guy had a gun in his truck. He drove to the party with his wife. If he wanted her dead when he was sober, he could have shot her on the way to the party, or at their own house, or right after getting to the party. Instead, he shot her (and the hosting couple) after he became drunk. To say the cause is the gun and not the alcohol is being ridiculous. 
Click to expand...
I'm saying let's ask the medical examiner what killed them. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

 
Apple Jack said:
I don't know, but I know the likelihood of a knife attack being fatal is far less than in cases of shootings. As are car attacks.
Click to expand...
Seems as though you're deflecting. We know the guy owned a gun. That's a fact. He became violent due to alcohol consumption. That's also a fact. But, you continue to ignore the reason he became violent and concentrate on the method. 

Too often we ask what triggers mass shooters. In this case, we have somewhat of an answer. Ignore it if you want, but I already posted two research articles that link firearm violence and alcohol. Remove guns, you'll still be left with the problem.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
At Least 181 K-12 Educators/Teachers Charged With Child Sex Crimes In First Half Of 2022 (10/1/22 9:22 PST)
Replies
36
Views
2K
tymarsas
T
GordonGekko
Did UC Berkeley Law School Enable "Jewish Free Zones" & Antisemitism With Pro Israel Speaker Bans? ( 10/2/22 11:12 PST)
Replies
10
Views
950
(HULK)
(HULK)
E
Taking Politics Out of Public Schools
Replies
37
Views
2K
MAC_32
MAC_32

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top