Cole reports: "The international comparisons show conclusively that fewer gun owners per capita produce not only fewer murders by firearm, but fewer murders per capita overall."
Murders by firearms in Britain are 30 times fewer per capita than in the US. (photo: file)
58 Murders a Year by Firearms in Britain, 8,775 in US
22 July 12
umber of Murders, United States, 2010: 12,996
Number of Murders by Firearms, US, 2010: 8,775
Number of Murders, Britain, 2011*: 638
(Since Britain's population is 1/5 that of US, this is equivalent to 3,095 US murders)
Number of Murders by firearms, Britain, 2011*: 58
(equivalent to 290 US murders)
Number of Murders by crossbow in Britain, 2011*: 2
(equivalent to 10 US murders).
For more on murder by firearms in Britain, see the BBC.
The international comparisons show conclusively that fewer gun owners per capita produce not only fewer murders by firearm, but fewer murders per capita overall. In the case of Britain, firearms murders are 30 times fewer than in the US per capita.
Do hunters really need semi-automatic AR-15 assault weapons? Is that how they roll in deer season? The US public doesn’t think so.
* British crime statistics are September to September, so 2011 is actually 2010-2011.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
 20 May 2013
|
 21 May 2013
|
 21 May 2013
|
 20 May 2013
|
 22 May 2013
|
 22 May 2013
|
 20 May 2013
|
 20 May 2013
|
 21 May 2013
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
It is not so much that our nation is flooded with firearms as that our national culture is permeated with blood and killing.
Study the history of the U.S.
Soaked with blood.
Study much of our "entertainment. " Soaked with blood and homicide.
Study our national response to international problems.
Break out the guns and bombs.
And U.S. citizens, like deer caught in headlights remain paralyzed while pundits and politicians ineffectually drone on. (Pun intended)
Hmm from me..... wonder where their guns came from... could it be.... from....us? nah
You are half right: "Gun" NOT culture
There are four times more knife-related killings as firearms-relate d killings.
The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London recently conducted some deeper analysis of the available Home Office's statistics.
It concluded that between 22,000 and 57,900 young people could have been victims of knife crime in 2004. However, it says without better official data it is impossible to know for sure - and that we need that data to improve the public debate.
The Home Office has pledged to change the way crime figures are presented to help the public better understand the impact on their area. One of the key changes is going to be separate knife crimes figures from 2008.
Yup...guess we better keep all our guns so we can continue to have 8,775 gun murders per year to prevent knife injuries...
There are four times more knife-related killings as firearms-relate d killings./quote]
I believe the stats in Canada are similar. The difference is, when you have to use a weapon like a knife you can't hide the fact that you are attacking someone. You have to get in close. Guns, especially high-powered rifles and automatic weapons, allow people to hide and kill randomly. That's very hard to do with a knife unless your a professional knife-thrower.. .
Actually, as most Brits and people of other more progressive nationalities are well aware, the US is one of the least free Western countries in spite of it's over-jingoistic , self-aggrandizi ng claims to the contrary.
"Freedom" here is only as good as the lobbyists and lawyers* one can afford to press one's interpretation thereof and so limit it to a few. So many others tend to live in a sense of fear, surveillance, mistrust of authority (possibly somewhat justified as the swing towards domination of the Corporate State continues) and suspicion of "The other", which may be why the *NRA is so powerful, fanning these flames of insecurity with their propaganda linking freedom to armed "readiness".
I'm a Scottish Brit' living here and can't wait to leave when I've accomplished what I came here to do. Hell, I grew up with the POLICE only being issued arms in situations of national emergency and this still exists to a large extent. Plus they will still come out in solidarity with labor and other publicly-funded workers against the current "austerity" attempts by Cameron's turncoat Tories, UNLIKE the increasingly militarized gendarmes here who are invariably turned loose to defend the interests and even protests against their wealthy and powerful masters in a vicious circle of "them against us".
Is THAT your idea of "Freedom"?
The stuff the Tea Baggers say about President Obama would have caused an immediate arrest under Nixon. A boy at summer camp sent a post-card to his family saying something like Nixon sucks, and the F.B.I. came to the camp, and it was only with the pleading of the camp director explaining that the kid was too young to know that you don't insult the President on your postcard that they let him go. But everybody had to be careful to be very patriotic after that, even though we knew that Nixon had been doing lots of dirty tricks.
Was invited to come to help work his small spread. He has been back only 3 times and each time mentioned the more violent our society has become and how people are more free, less fearful, and more open.
Yeah, free to be shot to bits!
funneee!
Don't try sarcasm in a computer age, those who use computers to help them think don't understand it.
Well anyway, most internet discussions are a lot more nasty than here, and comment period not closing leads to more thoughtful comments.
WOW! So many negatives for what seems to me to be a tongue in cheek comment. Is there something in this poster's history that shows him/her to have been serious?
There are almost as many guns in America as there are Americans. I cannot imagine that they will simply disappear if restrictions are put in place. Nor do I believe that those not inclined to obey the law are likely to give up their weapons even if demanded.
It may be a sad fact on some levels, but it is a fact nonetheless: American is a nation of guns. And it always will be.
For goodness sake, will some of you quit confusing "England" with the UK, which consists of Scotland, England, N. Ireland and Wales. This is a common and h'iggerant misnomer used all the time over here and is mentally and geographically lazy. It's like calling the USA "Texas" or Central America "Mexico".
Yes - and the ammo can go too.
The totals for one year, 1982, according to the Fiji Times were 6, 60, 160, 20,000 for Italy, France, Britain, U.S., respectively. Corrected for population that rate would be 1 1/2, 12, 32, 5,000. Had America had any sort of leadership that leadership would have been infuriated at such disparities and would have sought change. Alas there is no leadership in America.
Life is different in the US compared to life in Britain. The US government can intentionally run individuals so completely into the ground that they are driven to begging or starvation without any consequences to the government. In Europe (including Britain) the government who will do so, will inevitably shoot themselves in the foot, because in Europe governments have the legal obligation to uphold a social safety net. And then as a consequence of their actions find themselves cleaning up the mess of their own creation.
I was a-wondering if they have brains at all, softened and pummeled by decades of violent cop-worship serials full of almost by default, murder, mayhem, car chases, destruction and explosions as stuffing between increasingly lengthy commercials in a status-quo pattern of mind-numbing, predictable electronic death-circuses like the Roman spectacles of old.
It's fascinating to hear the same old faux-justificat ions by the pro-gun crowd posting here, that they have been trotting out like mindless echoes and ciphers mouthing off NRA platitudes about how "Guns = Freedom" in a self-imprisonin g cycle of inverse reasoning and as usual (like the antediluvian health care non-system and money-owned politics), out of step with more progressive nations who don't need arms to justify and propagate threats, fear of the other and distrust.
Fear conquers all and is part of the root that takes reason prisoner, permeating all who care to march in lock-step with such a medievalist culture.
I talked to a cop who said, "We are barely holding our own with the gangs." Yet the media under-reports the ethnic nature of it. Likewise, we've had several thousand deaths along the border with Mexico where the cartels are waging murderous war with each other and innocents in the wrong place. The real telling numbers are America's "disarmed" cities of New York and Chicago, where crime is out of sight. I don't know the exact gun death totals there as a subset of the larger murder. But really does it matter how you died in a violent crime? The egregious bias here is there are no statistics on how many violent crimes have been stopped by citizens having guns. Aurora is a great example of how a theater as a "gun-free zone" is a bad idea. A few properly trained, armed theater goers and that young man's spree would have been cut short. An interesting anecdote on WWII. Hitler asked permission for passage of his troops through Switzerland. The Prime Minister sent word to Hitler, "Our citizens will be lining the roadways to 'greet' you." Hitler chose a different route.
Thing is, if statistics were widely published, it would be obvious that gun crimes outnumber gun heroism by a factor of maybe 20. That grampa who shot two criminals was overwhelmed in numbers by the nut who shot 12 innocents.
The gun lobby claims that guns save lives, but they won't publish the stats because the stats belie it. As long as they don't, they can inflate their claims--even make them up. As long as the real numbers are kept secret. And they can also claim that "well, guns save lots of lives, but the heros don't get in the news because of George Soros," or one of their other ridiculous canards.
The sale of ammunition is available at the many shooting ranges patronized by both private citizens and members of the militia. There is a regulatory requirement that ammunition sold at ranges must be used there. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
First, Britain is a different culture.
Second, Britain reports "murders" differently than the United States. It reports homicides in the statistics, but unlike in the U.S., they aren't reported as "murders" unless unless someone has actually been convicted of the crime.
We HAVE statistics about gun control in the United States. We have been experimenting with restricting firearms ownership, in various states and municipalities, to various degrees, for over 80 years. We have been keeping statistics about it for over 50 years. And what those GOVERNMENT (DOJ) statistics show, beyond any reasonable doubt, is that in the United States anyway, gun control doesn't work.
Some statisticians have said they show no correlation, others have said that there is a NEGATIVE correlation (i.e., is has the opposite effect of what was intended).
What truth were you speaking about? All I got was a bunch of macho talk. Nice job of making yourself a victim. Nice job of using any excuse to slime President Obama and anyone who doesn't agree with your mind-st.
Civilian Guns
Compare
Number of Privately Owned Firearms
The estimated total number of guns held by civilians in the United States is 270,000,0001
Compare
Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population
The rate of private gun ownership in the United States is 88.82 firearms per 100 people
Compare
Number of Privately Owned Firearms - World Ranking
In a comparison of the number of privately owned guns in 178 countries, the United States ranked at No. 11
Compare
Rate of Privately Owned Firearms per 100 Population - World Ranking
In a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership in 179 countries, the United States ranked at No. 1
Source: gunpolicy.org (Australia)
Gun Death and Injury
Compare
Number of Homicides (any method)
ChartIn the United States, annual homicides by any means total
2010: 14,1595
2009: 15,241
2008: 16,272
2007: 16,929
2006: 17,030
Number of Gun Homicides
ChartIn the United States, annual firearm homicides total
2010: not listed
2009: 9,1467
2008: 9,48410 7
2007: 10,129
2006: 10,225
2005: 10,158
Rate of Gun Homicide per 100,000 People
ChartIn the United States, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is
2009: 2.985 7
2008: 3.12
2007: 3.36
2006: 3.42
2005: 3.43
My comment: dropping figures in the midst of rising gun ownership/conce aled carry!
ChartIn the United Kingdom, the annual rate of homicide by any means per 100,000 population is
2010: not listed
2009: 1.212
2008: 1.3
2007: 1.5
2006: 1.4412 4
2005: 1.53
Rate of Homicide per 100,000 People (any method)
ChartIn the United States, the annual rate of homicide by any means per 100,000 population is
2010: 4.67
2009: 4.965
2008: 5.35
2007: 5.61
2006: 5.70
2005: 5.66
You can get any number of conclusions from these figures, because it's apples and oranges. You are blaming gun culture, and you really, really think these numbers would go down without guns? I'm looking and saying, Hey, in a country with four times the likelihood of murder, I'd rather be armed, gentlemen. In San Antonio yesterday a crazed gunman began shooting in a theater. An armed off-duty woman cop put four bullets in him. No mass shooting! The media won't give it any air time. Now in Britain you may get off on being helpless victims. I guess that's your preference. The most intriguing fact revealed by these figures? Murder is going down in both countries. Why? If it was guns, then how do you explain the fact America has been setting records buying more guns per capita, 8 million sold since Sandy Hook, and the murder rate keeps dropping? ???
There will always be asses in any group, but as a general rule, liberals are far more honest, fair and intelligent than conservatives. If you don't believe that, check out NewsMax and try posting something mildly liberal there. Do that and you may change your mind about liberals talking tripe, but somehow I doubt you have the intellectual honesty to do so or to accept the obvious conclusions to be drawn from doing so.
AR stands for ArmaLite. The first two letters of the name of the company that developed the AR-15 and a complete line of guns all of which start with "AR". It does not stand for Assault Rifle.
Sweetie, just about all of the people who used assault weapons to kill scads of people from a distance were deemed "law-abiding" prior to the event. It's not professional criminals who commit these atrocities, so there goes your and the NRA's main argument. But after all, they were just shooting for fun, weren't they???
http://www.armalite.com/Categories.aspx?Category=34924c3c-54fa-4b4b-9e48-e56d7c3c05f7
I'm not sure who's hte ignoramus here. According to Wikipedia, "The AR-15 is a lightweight, 5.56 mm, magazine-fed, semi-automatic rifle, with a rotating-lock bolt, actuated by direct impingement gas operation or long/short stroke piston operation..." and it is issued to US military. That doesn't qualify as an assault weapon? True, any weapon is used to "assault" someone or something, but the term "assault weapon" is used to refer to automated weapons generally of military issue or intended for combat purposes. Dissing the commentator is the laziest way to make a point. Try showing that you understand something differently instead.
Get America off psychotropics and that miniscule 8,775 would probably dis-right-appear.
James Brady gets crippled and the entire left side of the political spectrum has a cause to distract.
Come on folks, these numbers are like worrying about getting struck by lightening on a bright sun shiney day in the Sahara.
...heh, a red thumbs delight...ey?
I would suggest that it's more likely you'll be hit by lightening or win the lottery than need your gun to protect you in your home or business. Unless, maybe, you're a drug dealer or jewelry courier. If it's not on your person 24 hours a day, loaded and ready to shoot (and you're emotionally ready to use it) a gun is basically nothing more than a macho paperweight.
From Wikipedia:
Suzanna Gratia Hupp, DC, (born September 28, 1959)[1] is a former Republican member of the Texas House of Representatives , who represented traditionally Democratic[cita tion needed] District 54 (Bell, Burnet, and Lampasas counties) for ten years from 1997-2007. After surviving the Luby's massacre in 1991, Hupp became a leading advocate of an individual's right to carry a concealed weapon. She was elected to her first term in 1996, but did not seek a sixth two-year term in 2006. She has also written a book called From Luby's to the Legislature: One Woman's Fight Against Gun Control, published by Privateer Publications, San Antonio, Texas.[2][3]
Sorry, I accidentally left a positive for this nonsense.
From a university study:
Great Britain
"The first country to consider is Britain, where they have endured a serious crime wave. In contrast to North America, where the homicide rate has been falling for over twenty years, the homicide rate in England and Wales has doubled over the past thirty years. In the 1990s alone, the homicide rate jumped 50%, going from 10 per million in 1990 to 15 per million in 2000 (British Home Office 2001).
In response to rising crime, British politicians, both Conser-vative and Labour, have brought in laws that increasingly re-stricted firearms ownership by the general public. Important changes to the firearm laws were made in 1988, and then again in 1992, before banning all handguns in 1997 (Greenwood 2001; Munday and Stevenson 1996). The Home Office has also tight-ened up on enforcement of regulations to such an extent that the firearm community has been virtually destroyed. Shotgun permits have fallen almost 30% since 1988 (Greenwood 2001). And the result of this Draconian gun control law in Great Britain? It's not pretty. No end appears in sight for the continuing crime wave."
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME GREAT BRITAIN?
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/society/factcheck+how+many+cctv+cameras/2291167.html
get a grip and get off the 'I so scared, we're not safe, life is just unsafe, nannystate, FEAR (False Evidence Appearing Real) soaked propagandized pov.
You don't dump the fear made decisions and the fear itself and you can do nothing but focus on the fear...life, especially in America is not near as dire as this thread and so much of the other one (The NRA's Dark Culture) on RSN tries to make out.
PSYCHOTROPICS...
To twist a well worn NRA faithful cliché around a bit, "It's not SURVEILLANCE cameras that kill, it's the security forces they unleash (if abused)".
Get a grip of the reality of rationalization .
You know why? The NRA gets its statistics from the Department of Justice, too.
That's what you're saying. That the Justice Department feeds us "propaganda" statistics.
What motivation might they have to do that? I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here.
We in the USA are put into desperation because of our huge for profit medical industry that shuts out anyone from services if they can't afford insurance. This exploitation for huge profits put most people in desperation. If your mother or any loved one can't receive medical help they desperately need to survive, it puts so many in a position to do something drastic. Robbing to get money to survive is seen by some as the only way.
I believe if we had even minimal coverage for everyone the desperation factor would shrink significantly. This was the only reasonable explanation to the conundrum of why so many killings in the USA.
That being said, I agree that there's no need to have assault rifles in the hands of the public. Let's hear any reasonable argument for the perceived necessity of these types of weapons
in the hands of the general public.
In the past few months (2002), widely televised tragedies in France, Germany, and Switzerland have spurred politicians to introduce changes in their countries' already strict gun laws to make them even more restrictive. Perhaps you remember the headlines? A depressed student in Germany ran amok and killed several people in his school after he'd been expelled. In both France and Switzerland, angry individuals have stormed into local councils and began shooting legislators indiscriminately.
This is not a new story. We've seen this show before. First, there is a horrible event, say a disturbed student shoots people in a school, or a maniac goes on a rampage in a public place. Media coverage is intense for a few weeks. "Experts" on television wring their hands in concern about the danger of "gun violence." Then the government feels it must do something to protect the public, so the police are given sweeping new powers, or new restrictions are introduced on owning firearms. Afterwards, the media rush off on a new story, and the public forgets. Later, there is another tragedy somewhere else, and the process starts all over again.
Does this sound familiar? It should. This has been the pattern followed by virtually every gun law that has been introduced in the twentieth century around the world.
In the 1990s, we've seen this drama on television from Australia, Great Britain, the United States, not to mention Canada, as well other countries. It's time to pause and ask a few basic questions. If gun laws work to prevent criminal violence, why do these events keep occurring? And not just in places where the gun laws are comparatively lax, but in countries where it is all but impossible for an average person to own a handgun. Guns are banned in schools. How could gun attacks happen in "gun free" zones such as schools?
If gun control is supposed to reduce violent crime, then eventually this must be demonstrated to be true, or gun control is no more than a hollow promise. However, most criminologists admit (albeit reluctantly) that there is very little empirical support for the claim that laws designed to reduce general access to firearms reduce criminal violence (eg, Kleck 1997). Frequently, assertions that gun laws work turn out to be bogus. In Canada, the government uses the falling homicide rate as support for their claim that gun control laws are working. Unfortunately for this argument, the homicide rate has been falling even faster in the United States.
Gun laws have played an important role in reducing crime rates in the US. Since 1986, more than 25 states have passed new laws encouraging responsible citizens to carry concealed handguns. As a result, the numbers of armed Americans in malls and in their cars has grown to almost 3 million men and women. As surprising as it is to the media, these new laws have caused violent crime rates to drop, including homicide rates. In his scholarly book, More Guns, Less Crime, Professor John Lott shows how violent crime has fallen faster in those states that have introduced concealed carry laws than in the rest of the US (Lott 2000). His study is the most comprehensive analysis of American crime data ever completed. He shows that criminals are rational enough to fear being shot by armed civilians.
As opposed to Zimmerman, who tried, convicted and EXECUTED an unarmed man, AFTER Zimmerman was told by police NOT to follow him. No one on this cite knows the full details, but when you stalk someone against police orders and then kill them, that is not self defense. (And yes, I DO know, I am a retired prosecutor; I DO own a gun and I AM in favor of gun control...It is the UNREGULATED distribution and redistribution of guns that places guns in the hands of criminals...Whe re do you think they get them? They are not homemade. and generally, in the cases I have seen, they were legally purchased and then sold and re-sold. If sales were better regulated (NOT prevented, but regulated, with proper police checks) then the illegal weapons could be kept from criminals. Unfortunately, the NRA is against ALL gun regulation. So, yes, as someone above stated, the NRA position runs counter to what law enforcement would want as sensible regulation.
Wow, so you are an anarchist? vigilantism is ILLEGAL. Tracking someone and the confronting them with a weapon is not legal even under Florida's 'stand your ground' law.
High-income countries Deat hs in millions % of deaths
Ischaemic heart disease 1.42 15.6%
Stroke & cerebrovascular disease 0.79 8.7%
Trachea, bronchus, lung cancers 0.54 5.9%
Alzheimer and other dementias 0.37 4.1%
Lower respiratory infections 0.35 3.8%
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 0.32 3.5%
Colon and rectum cancers 0.30 3.3%
Diabetes mellitus 0.24 2.6%
Hypertensive heart disease 0.21 2.3%
Breast cancer 0.17 1.9%
Gun Deaths America 0.008775 .00002%
Gun deaths Britain .0000 58 .0000009%
The FDA takes a million dollar "fee" for every new drug, and does none of its own research, and puts people on its investigation board who are high up in the drug industry: the FDA persecutes people who find cures for cancer, even while at the same time violating patents (look at Dr. Burzinski, but not the only case). This is personal to me, as my husband has cancer: it is no accident, nor is the continued pollution that causes cancer.
Mistakes are no mistake: a few might be, but try to stay awake for two days straight and then do a medical procedure: the medical mistakes out there, including neglect to even look for the drug interactions and side effects clearly labeled, are no accident. Nor is a bacteria-laden alcohol swab, or e-coli laced foods.
Then we have outright murder. It is very wrong. But compare that outright murder with the casual food poisoning, or toxic alcohol wipes, or exhausted resident, or endless meaningless argument with an honest researcher: these are all purposeful decisions.
To belittle the gun murders is not right. But to belittle the other murders, covered by "reasonable" expectations, is also very wrong, and should be criminal, not civil cases.
That kind of preventable?
Y'know it's all really about a sloppy ol concept called primacy. Who decided to go first at a four-way stop? We execute thousands of judgments a day while motoring the roadways, yet cannot handle simple matters like being armed.
Do you know that every Israeli citizen must serve in the IDF, their military? Every Israeli is responsible to be armed, have their arms in working order ready to use if called upon. Forget the Swiss, the Israelis have double, triple redundancy. The only issue if some nut opens fire in a restaurant are "field of fire" concerns by those taking the nut out.
Now why is it Israelis are deemed authorized to be armed, but as American citizens, . . . . we're just not sure anymore? You wish to live as a nation of adolescent imbeciles. Who then is going to take care of you, change your diaper?
This is not a rational conversation, it's just masquerading as one. I mourn the death of Aaron Zellman, founder of JPFO, Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership. Aaron used to say that if the Jews of German had refused to give up their arms there would have been no holocaust. I think he's correct. In the Netherlands when the Nazis posted an edict that all Jews must wear a yellow star on their jacket, the next day the entire population sewed yellow stars on their jackets. The Nazis gave up. Do you get it?
The liberals will never say that their positions are open to debate because they Know that their opinions are absolutely correct because when they walked by a bush that was burning without being consumed by the flames God then told them to ban guns. I've
been voting Democratic for 50 years but this time I may vote Republican to express my disgust with the know it all ultra liberals.
And no, God didn't "speak unto me," there was no burning bush--I figured this out on my own. I can think, despite your assertion otherwise--if I couldn't, I wouldn't be arguing with you. I'd've already said, "YES MASTER YOU'RE RIGHT I'M SORRY I EVER DOUBTED."
Yes, if someone is determined to kill, they'll find a way. But I see nothing noble in making it easy for someone to find the weapon to do their mass murders. I refuse to be their enabler.
Total number of disarmed people murdered by their own governments in the last century?
260 million
That is the victory of disarmament. Let's really work progressively to turn this country into North Korea. Will you burn with pride then?
Better be careful saying things like that, Mr. Cole. I used the same analogy several months ago in a different forum and some guy threw a hissy fit--apparently people don't buy semi-automatics to hunt deer. And here I thought that was my point! (Silly me!)
We the living.
Maybe you should stick with "We, the Disarmed."
Post a sign in your front yard, "This house is a gun-free zone." You progressive types love to use the power of the vote to compel performance from the rest of us. That is cowardice. The right to bear arms is a secured right, never to be separated from the American people. Yet you social tinkerers never agree to just leave it alone. You always have to reform the world with the conviction of your heart. But it's a lie. So is your compassion. You just hunger for an American people who can no longer resist your utopian yearnings (which always end in catastrophe). Study history!
And you will use your weapons to compel performance from the rest of us? This is YOUR idea of morality? You think that doing nothing makes you superior to the rest of us? NOTHING gets done by pessimism, by those who say, "It can't be done." You create nothing--you can only destroy.
The inane "support our troops" applies only as long as they're still able bodied and capable of killing. Once they become disabled, they're thrown on the trash heap.
Can't imagine why so much gun violence in this country? One has only to look at its priorities...th e MIC.
Bingers has obviously never heard of guerilla warfare, French Resistance, Belgian Resistance, etc. Or how about the German losses going into Russia; the Russian women abandoned on their farms who would rather die fighting than die being raped, whose marksmanship took a massive toll on the German Army, both in numbers and psychologically .
So finally someone who admits the nearly million dead in Iraq, our own national war crimes. We can be lied to about Yellow Cake, or Kuwaiti babies being thrown out of incubators, and we are willing to kill a million mostly civilians in a far off land. What of the Weathermen and their plans to imprison 50 million, kill off 25 million of them, right here in the US of A? It could never, never happen here, right?
First of all, Germany invaded Ukraine and most of its march was through Ukraine, so it wasn't "Russians" or "Russian women." Secondly, you seem to be watching too many soviet-made or modern movies on the subject. Hitler lost for the same reason Napoleon lost and Carl XII of Sweden lost: military miscalculations . In Ukraine, the German Army was welcomed with open arms initially because people hated the Soviet Union so much, but then the Germans started treating them as "Slav sub-humans" and that was the end of that. What this has with gun control, I don't know but I can assure you ordinary soviet citizens were not only gun-free, they were often also food-free and life-free for their efforts against communism.
The only reason the Russians survived at all was that we finally came to admit that we needed them to keep the Germans occupied in the East and finally sent them help with military equipment.
No resistance will ever defeat a well trained army and will never be effective without another combatant army against the one you are resisting. The French resistance was totally dependent on allied supplies and intelligence. In your addled argument that a bunch of NRA nut jobs could resist the Army or Marines is just dumb.
NO!
Here are links to the film Ghosts of Sand Creek and some of the eye witness accounts that went into the film, on the film's website: http://sandcreekmassacre.net/witness-accounts/
to read MNN: "Aurora Today's Sand Creek Massacre 1864" go to www.mohawknationnews.com www.indigenecommunity.info
In every feudal state the common folk were specifically disallowed weapon ownership and use it was restricted to the nobility and extension of the same..knights.
This was to reinforce societal role...nobels owned and protected..serf s worked and received a bit the proceeds of their toil..without ownership.
So england being a monarchy retains some aspect of feudalism...no weapon/gun ownership and kingship.
Our founding fathers not only absolved any monarchy they absolved completely any change of a monarchy.
Since the trapping of monarchy contain the nobel class and essentially a feudal reinforcement.. .and the democratic form of government in the US strictly rises up against that...we have weapon ownership potential in the US.
We are not educated the real why of how things are but only corporate nonsense in histories we are taught...so we don't know much about anything sat times.
Point being england and the US cannot be compared in some fashions equally...there is history of a different sort here.
Essentially in a serfdom you exchange freedom and ownership for safety...
Assault weapons are still nonsense as are extended clips, in both places by citizen held.
"Nobel" knights??? Didn't know that there was a "Nobe"l prize for "Knnnn-iggits" (per Monty P').
And there you go again, representing the "England" confused with UK crowd.
"England" retains a monarchy as taxpayers now but with no power or say whatsoever. Just (mostly American) tourists and Windsor sentimentalists . And by the way, Queen Liz' owns a good chunk of Manhattan real estate, me ould dahlin'.
Scotland has no truck with that nonsense and is a basically a socialist nation (not ONE Tory seat). Wales is close behind as is Northern England and Northern Ireland.
The US is by far the closest to serfdom -Corporate that is- and I'm not feeling much safety from the average doped-out on wanton ignorance US citizen. Not to be nit-picky but you might check y'r spelling a bit, especially in using words central t' your posting.
yes but very difficult. and Americans with guns and bullets kill people.
The second amendment requires your being a member of a "well regulated militia" to keep and have guns. There is NO outright right to own guns, despite what the most corrupt SCOTUS in history ruled.
I am British and live in the UK. It is my perception that Brits are more hard-drinking and inclined to belligerance than the average American person. Often our cities can become flashpoints on weekends when there are large numbers of drunken people around. Though troubled, America, in my albeit anecdotal experience, is more civilised, with fewer aggressive drunks.
Where we do differ is: Guns.
It is very difficult to get hold of guns in the UK, so a momentary bit of stupidity doesn't result in firearm death, likewise, feeling down one day, you can't blow your head off and so life goes on.
This is in my view, purely down to the availability of guns in the US.
Nobody wants guns in the UK for just this reason. 99% (at a guess) of British citizens, even if they love other aspects of American culture, think having guns available easily is completely crazy.
One man's rational is another man's irrational?
What is your current rate of taxation? I've heard as high as 80%. Is that correct? We fought for American independence saying, "No taxation without representation. "
Peoples training in gun usage police hunters and other routinely I would guess in each session expend at least a hundred bullets.
Most police train with their weapons at least quarterly. Hunters about three or so times before the hunt is my guess.
Target shooters are a really small population compared to the other groups I would guess but they spend many many rounds monthly in their training. Thousands
England is a kingdom. It has been ruled by one family or another since Roman times.The English people have been bred to ne docile for almost two thousand years. They deported the Scots and the Irish to other lands after subjugating them brutally. The British state is armed and suppresses dissent with great force and violence.The English People are ruled by an unpublished constitution and live with petite rights. The English people are gentle, weak, respecters of authority.Ameri cans are different that that sorry picture.We have a predatory government and a predatory law enforcement and law making community.We are ripe for revolution and have done that twice in short history.To stifle revolt a tyrant would have to disarm their unruly subjects. And the Liberals want to try...That be foolish thinking.
I clicked on the green hand to give you a thumbs up. Not only did it not record my approval, it increased the - thumbs down - by 1. That's fraudulent vote counting!
*** RSN MODERATOR'S NOTE ***
I promise you, Johnny Genlock, we do not contract to Diebold for the thumbs-vote count.
While you are reading a comment many other people are also reading it, and voting. When you click a thumbs up or down it refreshes the count with the total of all the votes during that period of time - not just yours.
To see an accurate reflection of your vote just refresh the page and vote right away.
The National Rifle Association is an industry gun lobby for manufacturers.
Besides, the second amendment has nothing to do with guns. It allows the Revolutionary Army soldiers to take their rifles home, since they had no barracks.
Ban all the "Assault" weapons you want, mentally unstable people will still be unstable, and will find a way to lash out at whatever demons they imagine. The answer is not simple, and will take a serious redirection of resources in our society. Ironically many who treat gun ownership almost as a religion also politically oppose the expenditure of public resources on the social componets necessary to address this issue.
What I find interesting is those who own assault weapons, etc. to protect themselves from the "gummint" takeover of their "freedoms". They've already lost and don't know it.
The stats of the commenter are almost all illegal gun stats. The stats for legal guns would put us among the safest counties.
The commenter's stats claim the US has 24+ murders per day from guns. 8775 per year. How come the terminally righteous liberal community only goes nuts when a crime is committed using legally owned guns.
The massacre at Ft Hood by the Muslim Major was, according to Divine Barry, a workplace incident. All the dead & wounded a water cooler disagreement. Is Barry going to Colorado to tell the people that insane massacre was a movie critique?
Are you suggesting that people acquire guns legally, go through the hassle of getting them registered & then turn around & sell them illegally? That would be done knowing that the person's name & the serial number of the gun are on file?
Isn't that what Fast & Furious is all about?
We the living.
“It's time we had an adult conversation in this country about guns.”
“...we have not had a real conversation about guns in many, many years. The National Rifle Association (NRA) threatens the career of any politician who so much as opens the conversation.
“...our country has not discussed assault weapons – which have no use except killing large numbers of people...”
“We have not discussed the fact that anyone can buy a gun at a gun show without any background check, even if they have a history of criminal violence.”
“ We have not discussed the expiration of the ban on large clips, which allow shooters to kill more people in a shorter time because they don’t have to reload.”
“ We have not discussed what a sensible, rational approach to regulating guns in our country might be.”
“Enough.”
“It’s time we took steps to stop the mass killings.”
“It’s time we had an adult conversation about guns in this country. The NRA can go to hell.”
Thank you Darcy for telling it like it is.
I am supporting Darcy.
We need people like her in Congress. She champions social and economic justice, and peace.
Send Darcy a campaign contribution.
And to hell with the NRA.
Colonialism serves as example of how to subject populations, western governments have been masters in that. Peoples are not mastered by force of arms...balances are changed that is all.
A native population of thousands upon thousands was conquered and held...and the holding is the important thing...by several hundred spaniards...how ....by allegiance...an d by that changing balance...in the end power balance..
Peoples talking guns weapons reasoning revolution or protection from government spouting usually hitlers words on gun control.....Hit ler held territories for less time than any other conqueror, active insurgencies in every place conquered.....
.colonialists...they held territories and bent them to their will for hundreds of years....weapon ry restriction...n ot part of their play book.
Perhaps we look at the roman playbook.... did not their christ put back the ear of one temple person, cut off by another with sword....the romans the greatest holder of territory and benders to the will others....did not restrict weaponry ownership by their subjects... a jew held that sword, not roman.
Change things... revolt against your rulers using you weaponry being key....sorry no never.
[macleod77: Comparing death from illness to death from gunfire is not a valid argument. Last time I checked, it was not yet a crime to be sick. When it is anyone’s time to die, I hope it will be from natural causes, not violence.]
Then there is the consideration of the Second Amendment, ratified in 1791. The arms of the time were single-shot weapons which were loaded through the muzzle and fired by means of a flintlock. That is what the lawmakers of the late 18th century knew to be the available technology. There was nothing automatic about them. There was nothing multiple about them. There were no magazines. You fired one musketball at a time and it took a while to do that. There is an excellent discussion here on a Columbia Law School blog: http://columbiaacs.blogspot.com/2007/11/right-to-bear-ye-olde-arms.html
What do you say we limit your right to “keep and bear arms” to your right to a musket?
Between the mid-1950s and the late 1970s, the suicide rate among U.S. males aged 15-24 more than tripled (from 6.3 per 100,000 in 1955 to 21.3 in 1977). Among females aged 15-24, the rate more than doubled during this period (from 2.0 to 5.2).
Could all this be due to the hopelessness they feel? The lack of control over their lives?
Every time I turn around there is another vote in Congress to rip more of our rights away.
The less freedom the more suicides? I'd say so. Now compare this to gun deaths.
Over 36,000 people in the United States die by suicide every year.
As to the numbers I posted. I found them easily using Google.
Have you noticed that civilizations which have a low crime and homicide rate also has laws in which the community does NOT have guns?
Right, Hitler was controlled by Jews? Just how anti-semitic are you?
And if you truly knew your history you would know what I am saying is true. Hitler was funded by the British Rothschilds in London. That's why when things went silent, he sent his closest confidant, Rudolph Hess, in 1941 to find out why the funding had ceased. Later in 1943 the cover of a purported peace proposal was presented as the reason for Hess's secret journey. If that were true, it should be reason for some great interviews of Hess. But they don't exist. Why no interviews? Why was he held incommunicado as the sole inmate of Spandau Prison for the rest of his life, dying in 1987? If you haven't checked out the Interrogation of Christian Rakovsky, don't go around tossing labels, bingers.
This is a sad commentary on the state of education in the U.S.
I assure you this is not anything that is taught in US schools, or in any public schools in the world for that matter. There is some evidence, I don't know personally how reliable, that both World Wars were allowed to happen on some level to weaken Germany. But that's not something I am a qualified commentator on. What I do think is, had Germany been allowed to take out Stalin, the Allies could then have taken over the Nazis with far less loss of life and Eastern Europe would not have suffered 50 years of communist rule.
As far as Germany taking over the Soviet Union, that could never have happened. Napoleon tried it and found out Russia is a BIG, BIG place and it's very very cold in the winter. The standard defense is to retreat eastward and burn the land in front of the enemy so there's no food. Without food and fuel, the Germans would have suffered the same fate as Napoleon's army.
The scorched earth policy was not applied to Ukraine. Ukraine was simply occupied for two years. There were serious military mistakes made when the Germans tried their pincer operation in the northwest (Belarus and Russia). Had the Germans not wasted the good will they initially had in Ukraine, that could have been used to great advantage in the war. But they started shipping young people to Germany as slave labor instead (Ostarbeiter). Stalin was prepared to lose every last soviet man, woman and child to win the war and it was that as much as anything that made it hard to beat him. BTW, he had executed the entire officer class early in the war, which meant his armies were being led by ideologues rather than generals in many cases. So they had to hold guns to the backs of their soldiers to get them to keep fighting. Most POWs were executed when returned after the war. Returned civilians were exiled to Siberia.
so my say on that..... peoples who believe in rational gun contol but not total gun restriction of ownership are not necessarily of that sort.....we are just perhaps rural when you are urban
Some of us know not your life and some of you know not ours....
Those things to say them...a bit silly, about giving nothing of substance to the discussion.
Someone from the right painting a picture of gated communities some sort of la la land and then stating those are gun control advocates....I' d say that is about the same and leads not to discussion of this issue...but to something else.
What is accomplished with that something else....has anyone asked themselves that?
Total: $513,646
$15,500 to individuals
$498,146 to Political Action Committees
$67,550 to Democrats
$446,096 to Republicans
26 Democrats got NRA money
206 Republicans go NRA money
The GOP wants to privatize Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and education.
The GOP wants to enact more job-killing free trade agreements.
The GOP wants to give more tax breaks to the “super rich” (despite the fact that they hide over $21 trillion in “tax havens”. Yes. 21. Yes. Trillion!)
Why any working class person would join or support the NRA is beyond reason. The NRA supports lawmakers who want to keep working families under their thumbs.
Madness & Genius often go hand in hand. Despite his being a completely insane, violent sociopath, the Joker's speech touches on an unbelievably important point of human perception: it's tragically Linear. millions of years of evolution have made us keenly aware of the occasional Lion & it's ability to eat us, but completely unable to detect the bacteria in the food we are about to eat.
This analogy is proven in the statistics I showed: We Hyper-focus on the event that has less probability of killing us than winning the lottery on a crashing Commercial Airliner while suffering a heart attack after being struck by lightning.
Septicemia killed 30,000 people last year. Guns, 3.7k. Septicemia is almost 10 TIMES more likely to kill you.
Watch this:
http://www.ted.com/talks/bruce_schneier.html
There are supposedly over 300,000,000 guns in this country and 330,000,000 people. With less than 9,000 shootings, the percentage surprises me.
The point is America is a knee jerk nation. We're always so ready to put prohibitions on ourselves. We've watched our freedom erode, our privacy disappear, and our representatives become rulers instead of public servants. We allow corporations to kill ten times more people with "legal" drugs than are killed with guns. We allow corporations to pollute our water, our air, our food, our election system, our economy, and our future on the planet. And we are bamboozled into knee-jerk illegal undeclared wars for profit despite our Constitution and nobody seems to mind.
The new patriotic austerity means fewer police and therefore protection for the populace and now they want to disarm us too.
Prohibitionists would have to suspend the Constitution while the "authorities" kicked open every door in America to find every single gun. They never mention that.
535 insanely powerful people can destroy the earth a thousand times over. Why don't prohibitionists disarm them?
If you had read Tinker22's statement that Congress was ignorance of semi-automatic weapon technology when they ratified the 2nd amendment in 1791, you would see my comments were on point. However, from reading your comments, you seem more interested in acting as a self appointed moderator. When an incorrect statement is countered, it is neither meaningless nor out of context. The fact that there are people with valid arguments who disagree with you taking away our Constitutional right to self defense is something you have to live with. Your opinion as to what is meaningless is meaningless and your accusation petty . Nothing personal.
http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/437-2nd-amendment-rights/12532-because-i-felt-like-it-
Is the purpose of advocacy to excite the base or to convince new people. Unfortunately unpaved armatures think that massage the base is what is important and the left can't afford to hire professions who know better like the right can.
Yes and a disgrace too.
The only reason for the Second Amendment was so Revolutionary Soldiers could take their rifles home. Today, the military locks them up.
Try getting to know your neighbours & fellow humans, make healthy ecological livelihood & build the biosphere resources of the earth 100 times (10,000%) back to their pre-colonial days. Give thanks for the inter-dependent work of billions of people worldwide & live in respectful solidarity with all. If you have money fear-burning a hole in your pocket asking to buy a gun, think about investing in making the world a better place with these resources. Invest in youth, in natural resource generation, in life. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/design/1-indigenous-welcome-orchard-food-production-efficiencies
You're a little confused. Colonists brought their own guns to fight the Brits and then took them home with them. Those who were provided with guns (Continental soldiers) may have been allowed to keep them but I doubt it. GI is "Government Issue", not government gift.
I don't like what the NRA has become. But think about it friend. an educational organization has been usurped by corporations, place blame where it's due if you want to demonize something. Now if the NRA declared open season on Lobbyists and PACs we all might feel little differently.
Cheer Juan Cole, but spread around,
http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/419-gun-control-/12597-dark-knights-in-colorado-dark-days-in-america
http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/437-2nd-amendment-rights/12532-because-i-felt-like-it-
It conveniently leaves out the killings by knives, clubs, and even rocks. Humans are violent, unstable creatures by temperament and will find ways to kill other people no matter what restrictions are invented. It's easy to blame weapons because that requires no thinking or effective action, only slogans and more useless laws.
No they don't and you know it. Otherwise you would have included more than one country in your comparision. You would also have compared the same country before and after changes in gun ownership per capita. In America they bought a lot more guns and crime, particularly homicide, went down. Face it, the anti-gunners have lost the battle when they resort to this sort of single comparision rubbish.
We, as citizens receive far less from our tax dollar than ever before, and the gluttons demand even more austerity on our part as the rich keep getting disproportionat ely richer and government becomes better armed for corporate imperialism. They can't protect us from a determined enemy foreign or domestic or from Them- and especially not in our homes.
If I were running a government like that, I'd want to collect all the guns I could. I think there's little difference between psychotic with a gun and a uniformed kid with a joy stick and a drone under orders of even bigger psychopaths. The only difference being one of them is sanctioned and allegedly bringing democracy to the world- The other is full of self-hate-bent on destruction and seeking a moment of infamy- And likely loaded on prescription drugs or off the wagon thereof.
Government cuts back on cops and disarms us so we live in more fear. Destabilization and fear makes government more powerful. Look what our government does to other countries and you'll see what they are doing here. It's a pattern and it begins with knee-jerk propaganda no matter how well meaning and/or corporatized the source.
The Pacific Ocean is a thousand times the size of the US and Britain combined and they've had no gun murders....ufb.
Not to mention, British are educated compared to Louisiana...
But never mind, keep exposing your willful ignorance and stubborn stupidity. It amuses those with an IQ above room temperature.
“If Frank Marshall Davis could have nationalized GM in the 1940s,” Kengor began, “he would have.”
“Obama was his pupil.”
A key is getting all supposed 'diplomacy' out in the open where all parties are accountable for what they say. All of us everywhere at every level should engage each other in such 'dialectic' dialogues in our homes, buildings, communities, business, schools, government, media, institutions etc. Aggression, injury, war, armament production & hidden financing of conflict is for cowards only. Violent cowards although armed-to-the-te eth are the most afraid & immature people alive. Transparency & revelation of the truth is what gun-holders & soldiers are afraid of. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/structure/1-both-sides-now-article
"The definition of psychopathic paranoia is owning a gun for supposed 'security'. The definition of collective dementia is 4.3 million paranoids joined together in the NRA spending billions of dollars feeling powerless in their inability to make the world a place of healthy relationships & complaining."
You should have a blog so fewer people would realize you're an intellectual myopic attempting to dazzle with a gospel according to you.
As a Canadian hocking communal condo living in the utopian north, your peace-love-Harr y Krishna's Bar and Grill philosophy might work for a few easily controlled grazing dim-wits, but you're as much of an instigator as anyone. You only prove it when you resort to name calling to grab attention for your posts.
Calling people you don't know anything about "cowards" is easy from a key board in a tee pee in the wilderness. I recommend you do it in person a time or two- even in Canada.
I spent a decade living in & travelling through poorer parts of USA & Canada, hitch-hiking over 100,000 miles, riding rails, bicycling, sleeping under bridges, hired in social work, special-educati on, crisis-counsell ing & more. I spent the 70s living among 1st Nation, Russian Dukobour, German Mennonite & English Quaker pacifist communities. I've been incredibly lucky to have been received with such kindness. Recently having come haphazardly upon a riot here in Montreal. A police officer had dropped a briefcase due to aggressive protestors. I stopped, picked up the spread articles, handed these to the police & chastised 6 masked youth face to face. I'm 60, live & work in the city. Word history & language is a 50 year passion. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/home/2-mutual-aid
I'm sorry to read that you're not very well traveled, it shows. But it's nice to know you're polite to riot police. Such haphazard ramblings are indicative of your posts as well. You and Gandhi, quite the comparison if a bit narcissistic. It's humbling.
Thanks for the website of your meandering musings, it was disappointing. But it's obvious to a lot of people you're more than trying.
You should look up Marxist in the dictionary before using it again. It is inadvisable to use words for which you have no idea of the meaning.
Das Kapital's accounts for the cultural relationship between labour (expertise, time, coordination) & 'capital' (Latin 'cap' = 'head' or 'wisdom') elaborate on its accounting components for book-keeping & economic cycles should be essential reading for accounting, business & political science. Marx's research on different historical & current enterprise ownership models describe hierarchal, cooperative & participatory entities. Marx's preferentially describes the Swiss participatory models.
Lenin, financed by German backers, upon launching the 'Soviet' (Russian 'village-counci l') revolution, adopts the 'co-op' as a singular national model for supposed 'communism'. Kropotkin's 'Mutual-Aid' based in labour accounting & progressive ownership over lifetimes in the Guilds are discouraged & even banned. Co-ops don't account for labour, discouraging participation with simplistic one-member/one- vote structure & bureaucracy which inevitably destroy them. 46 years https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy
I think because of our Christian history we feel guilty faster. We been lectured so frequently that Buddhism stands for nonviolence that we believed it until the bloodbath in Burma got in the way of the illusion.
But if the right of self-protection is ever taken away, it will be open season. And there will be a lot more criminals because many citizens will not comply with a ban. Gun control is a must. Too bad the government does such a lousy job at it.
But it's the same with drugs, poverty, ignorance,menta l health, massive white collar crime, and the clear loss of democracy. No wonder they want all the guns, honest people might get upset...
I'm not worried about mass murderers, the media creates and glorifies them. They will continue so long as they're treated like that Hilton bimbo or an overdosed rock star. The media creates a cult in the mass murderer's head. Go figure.
I'm more concerned about the pharmaceutical induced criminal kicking in my door willing to kill for a stereo or a wallet. A remote possibility? Close enough.
Let's quit feeding the troll.
A bully is a coward when confronted by someone stronger. Guns have allowed too many cowards to become bullies.
Unfortunately compulsives don't take responsibility for the world, which their reaction is constantly creating. Compulsives have trouble deconstructing the negative human-relations , which drive their fears. Deeper is ability to compassionately understand our perceived adversary as one's self.
Abraham Maslow's 'Hierarchy-of-N eeds' helps to break down the chain of events which drive fear-reaction in our population. As basic food, shelter, clothing, warmth & health needs are ignored, a complex chain of events are set in motion.
To conjecture based on some of the knowns. Nancy's alcoholism, Adam's possible Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, fits the description of inherent fetal alcohol brain damage. Putting Adam on a pharmaceutical diet of anti-depressant s, seem to have liberated his unfulfilled & drug-perverted id (imagination) with marksman training to fulfill the coward-bully cycle.
Individuals & whole nations in such reactive fear-cycles don't pro-act in mutual-aid for meeting primary needs. Colonial society is fraught with violence & self-righteousn ess in denial of genocide we've inherited & perpetuate. The 'RIGHT-TO-BARE- ARMS' must become one of rolling up our sleeves to help each other. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/home/2-mutual-aid
Yest, the criminals here have no problem getting anything they want. Traficantes (drug dealers) often are better armed than the police.
As in the USA, most killings by guns are one criminal shooting another. Naturally, the anti-gun lobby chooses not to make that distinction when tossing around their statistics.
We can ban all guns, then it will be knives. After all knives are banned and we must live on soup, it will be baseball bats. When those are banned, it will be rocks and forks. The real problem is people. Shall we ban those, too?
While working as a chemical laboratory technician at a Pulp Mill, I started a Pollution Control Committee for the union. Fellow Dukobour & Mennonite workers informed me a participatory mill in my home Quebec. We received enthusiastic collaboration from management & launched multistakeholde r participation for Managers, Workers, Suppliers & Consumers which then expanded to a network of pulp-mills.
What does Marxism, Capitalism, Communism etc have to do with Gun Control? These are systems we live, work, consume & interact with daily. Because they're all unbalanced, without feedback & communication for most of the people involved, they set a stage of underlying violence, inefficiency & a growing scarcity, destroying the biosphere. Participatory incorporation. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy/3-rateable-corporations
I'm so anti-Semitic that the church I tithe to just paid for new x-ray equipment for an Israeli Hospital near the zone with Lebanon. I'm also so anti-Semitic that I attended a lecture last night given by Bryan Mark Rigg, purchased a signed copy of Rigg's book, Lives of Hitler's Jewish Soldiers; a compilation of research and interviews with surviving Jewish soldiers of the Third Reich. I asked Rigg what motivated him, a Jew, to do the research. He said he was researching his own Jewish roots and came across this untold story. Not only was Hitler supported by wealthy Jewish bankers, Hitler had approximately 10,000 Jewish or part-Jewish soldiers faithfully serving the Third Reich. Ain't real history interested! BTW, Rigg is a Marine.
Somehow I missed your qualifications for expert testimony on guerilla warfare. Sure, military could pull a Fallujah here in American against their own people. How many million troops are they prepared to come up with when the American people go berzerkers (as my Norwegian friend calls it)? Sure, you can "take" turf, but can you "hold" it?
My first intro to guerilla warfare was meeting and befriending a member of the Belgian Resistance. She, Fanchette, was raped by a German soldier at age 13, decided to turn that proclivity into an advantage and killed many German soldiers and some officers by prostituting herself to get close to kill them. Later when the military gave orders and the Germans quit using female prostitutes, . . . she joined a stakeout team which would attack and kill German soldiers on the roadways. In the process the Resistance was able to arm themselves from confiscated armaments and explosives. Then she joined a snorkel team and blew bridges with the dynamite they had recovered.
When I was in Brussels last trip I went to a flea market and found a large volume listing over 10,000 names of Belgians executed for being in the Resistance, or being suspected of being in the Resistance. 10,000 stories, some lengthy, most short, of Belgians who died fighting for their country AFTER the Nazis took over.
I still have a fond memory of Fanchette holding up a glass of red wine and singing Golden Earrings. The Belgian Resistance survived by living with the gypsies, stealing chickens with them, using maggots to clean their wounds and then later frying up the maggots for protein. Never underestimate the home turf advantage.
You disparage FEMA concentration camps, use it like "anti-Semitic" as a label. Interesting pathology, label-slinging. Got any more labels in your six-shooter label maker, Pard? And then you fantasize you have won debate. What? Who needs a shrink? Confusing "consensus" again with proof. Sounds like a break from reality to me.
My first evidence on the FEMA concentration camps was interviews I did of: Vietnam Special Forces Air Combat Controller; (25-year CIA deep-cover agent; US Army pilot flying classified missions during the US invasion of Grenada; Iran-Contra pilot flying cocaine shipments labelled as medical supplies; and member of the ultra-secret, international G8-run Pegasus "hit team"...this is the extraordinary story of Gene "Chip" Tatum.) I conducted interviews of Tatum at the behest of a former head of the Los Angeles FBI, SAIC Ted Gunderson; who previously had run the Dallas Office, previous to that the Memphis Office, . . . Tatum testified that as a member of the then ultra-secret Task Force 160 (later public as 160th Aviation), he flew night vision goggle flights in extremely dark green helicopters known to the public as the black helicopters (another label???), and did R.O.N.'s (Rest OverNights) at many closed military bases and other bases converted for civilian detention. These are your FEMA bases, not the duds Glenn Beck straw-debunked on his program.
My second source on FEMA concentration camps is/was a plans and policy man for FEMA by the name of Col. John R. Brinkerhoff. I heard and taped Brinkerhoff's lecture at the Strategic Indirect Warfare Conference, February of 2004, hosted by Sandia Laboratories in Albuquerque. Brinkerhoff's lecture was on Catastrophic Emergencies, which went all the way from nukes down to a prolonged power outage or an ECONOMIC DOWNTURN. Brinkerhoff's solution--remem ber this guy wrote policy for FEMA and now Homeland Security--is to employ a minimum of 400,000 "armed, disciplined, organized and trained" troops to surround/quaran tine a metro area, to evacuate EVERYONE to relocation centers (RELOCATION CENTERS!)-no exceptions-and to deal very sternly with (kill) resisters. What is missing from the official version released later by the Sandia team was the Q&A from a Special Forces officer in the audience. He questioned Brinkerhoff's approach and stated that Special Forces goes into 3rd World countries and in 8 months trains locals to take care of themselves in any contingency/eme rgency. He said it might take 12 months in America where everyone watches TV, but with as little as 2,000 Special Forces troops deployed across this country, Americans could be trained in a year to take care of themselves in emergencies, . . . just like 3rd World nations. Brinkerhoff replied, "Sorry, we're not going to do that."
So, you would ostracize FEMA concentration camps when it comes right from the lips of their own Plans and Policy man who was formerly the author of Rex 84? Who is the kook here? You must have drunk the Koolaide the Mainstream Media is serving out. Bon appetite!
I was attempting to schedule to interview James Hatfield, author of Fortunate Son, . . . but then he committed suicide. I was also in on a phone conversation and was attempting to get down to Houston area to interview Margie Schoedinger, a black woman who claimed Bush, Jr., had raped her while serving as Governor. I didn't make it before she committed suicide as well. I was not on my way to interview Gary Webb (Dark Alliance) when he committed suicide by double tapping himself in the back of the head. The press lady for the Sacramento County Medical Examiner's Office claimed shooting one's self twice in the head was not that unusual. They had several other cases on file of suicides with two shots to the head!!! So, . . . with trepidation I mention the strange case of Joel Gilbert who claims he is NOT suicidal, yet has written a book about Obama entitled: Dreams From My Real Father. My prayers are with him. Does the name Frank Marshall Davis ring any bells? Being uninformed can truly be an art form. It allows one the option of supererogating to one's self qualities of intelligence and wisdom amidst the small pond subset, while willfully choosing to ignore the ocean of information which might wash away all question of being knowledgeable.
"Weathermen, a small group from the Sixties, are you insane?"
Hey, Bing, I thought that's how Marxist groups always start out, . . . small group. Are you going to tell me I'm a conspiracy theorist because I noticed?
* * *
An FBI Informer with the Weathermen” alleges Bill Ayers, a friend of President Obama, told Grathwohl that Bernardine Dohrn, who later became Ayers’ wife, placed a pipe bomb outside a San Francisco Police Department building Feb. 16, 1970.
The shrapnel from the antipersonnel bomb’s explosion killed Sgt. Brian V. McDonnell. Another officer, Robert Fogarty, was wounded in the face and legs and left partially blind.
* * * *
In Leon Trotsky's book, THE PERMANENT REVOLUTION, Trotsky outright claims that if you do not support terrorism, you do not support the revolution. I think we should take ol Leon at his words and not ignore the blood on the hands of these Marxist social engineer types. I cannot count the number of times these educated idiots tell me (when I bring up the several hundred million victims) that "It just needs a little tweaking" to get it right. I am sorry for y'all that you have bought the lie that gun control will curb violence. Even if it did, it sets the stage for Marxist mass-murderers to have their way with you, your wives, your children. Gun control is not something a responsible adult should engage in, unless the control refers to marksmanship.
* * * * * *
Douglas, there are some people left of center I have respect for, for their acumen in getting things done; such as Catherin Austin Fitts, for instance. The right has a penchant for focusing on being right over giving attention to the human details of how we get things done. Yet there is a fine line distinction between community activity and coerced collectivism. For a balanced view on the situation, there are several books to read. This list would include two of W. Cleon Skousen's works, The Naked Communist,(and) The Naked Capitalist. Two very good books, may be out of print or hard to obtain: Tragedy & Hope by Prof. Carroll Quigley; The Fabian Freeway by Rose Martin. This is an excellent study primer on how those in power pursue keeping it and extending it further.
Douglas, historically slaves are disarmed. What is a stakeholder but a slave in a high-tech collective? A tyranny always disarms it citizens, while militarizing an enforcement portion. I am amazed by the inability of readers to understand Aurora as a False Flag op. Cui Bono?
I agree with gun owners that; if someone is harming the lives of innocents, then protect them however we can. However having held, carried & shot firearms myself, I know they are heavy & inaccurate as well as a hazard to innocents themselves. Even well trained police & soldiers injure & kill an incredible number of innocent citizen by-standers with firearms weekly in the USA.
Given the low rate of violent incidents, the expense & weight of carrying over the course of an hour, day, week, month, year, decades, one must calculate energy expended & the results achieved.
We've many options in daily living to invest time & energy far more effectively to make a better world. eg. When individuals with differences are brought together 'dialectically' ('both-sides') to 'debate' (French 'de' = 'undo' + 'bate' = 'the-fight') we gain perspective from both-sides. www.indigenecommunity.info
Given: 1) our short finite lives, 2) people worldwide who are contributing to our livelihood, then it is incumbent upon us to perform our collective duty & contribute to essential (food, shelter, clothing, warmth & health) services for all everywhere. Perpetual fear & paranoia isn't an excuse for not doing our part.
* * *
Hours ago a gunman took the lives of at least 26 people, including 20 children, at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. According to the New York Times, the gunman, also found dead at the scene, has been identified by a law enforcement official as Adam Lanza. His mother, who was a teacher at the school, along with 20 students, was shot and killed mostly in one classroom. He also shot and killed five other adults. Reports say that Lanza was carrying four weapons and was wearing a bulletproof vest. A semi-automatic .223 Bushmaster, a Glock, and a Sig Sauer were recovered from the scene.
* * *
Gun-free zone = guaranteed access to victims. Douglas, why don't you outlaw psychopaths? See how much luck you'd have with that. The Dude killed his own mother, m'God, then had the bad manners to die himself before questioning!
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/ascii/fuo.txt
Minority members accused of a crime is more likely to be incarcerated.
I’m in Philadelphia which makes it a fetish to long incarcerate people for weapons offense.
http://whyy.org/cms/news/regional-news/2010/03/18/pa-attorney-general-announces-arrests-in-illegal-gun-sales/34034
A gun bought by a timid neighbor or a mother unable to feed her children unless she gets a gun for her boyfriend leads to children raised without parents. Gentle people who are pushed around have a harder time in prison then tough guys.
There are ways to discourage gun deaths without overcrowding our prisons. For instance if the gun in a gun free zone or in possession of someone who has no right to have them is found locked up upon arrest, the charges could be far less. There are now fingerprint controlled boxes to hold locked guns some small enough to carry in a side pouch. One way or another we in this country need to try to solve our problems without putting a lot of people in jail,
More on less gun crime and less jail time @
http://www.dailypaul.com/268070/outlawing-guns-in-cities-requiring-cell-phones-only-locked-in-trunk
http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/78-78/15338-the-real-story-of-barack-obama
Guns were as much a necessity as an axe for firewood or flint to make a fire. You can't apply today to yesterday, any more than you can define your neighbor's need or their definition of necessity.
I think it's clear the 2nd Amendment included gun ownership rights to non-militia citizens for obvious reasons. The right to self defense was unquestioned then, to do so would have been illogical. The founders were not illogical.
The right exists today because of the very real perception of necessity. Just as you have the right to relinquish it. There are far more people who disagree with that idea judging by the number of guns.
The 2nd Amendment approved the formation of local militias and forbade government interference with those militias or a citizen's right to bear arms. Your interpretation lacks logic.
You are making a foolish argument. The right to bear arms is established and attempting to tweak the accepted interpretation which by common action and interpretation is the law of the land- is ludicrous.
If you and I chase down an armed burglar who has just invaded a neighbor's house we are a posse. We may not subject the suspect to punishment or deadly force but we may act in self defense and in the interests of preventing further crime or danger. On they other hand, you can stand by and allow crime to happen, even Twitter and put video on YouTube, but you'll find I'm right. We are responsible under the law. I prefer to not be under-equipped in that regard. So far, I have the right to be equipped despite attempts at re-interpretati on. You can't stand by and watch the commission of a crime. In fact, you'll find, as lately in Ohio, you can be named as a conspirator if you do. If you want to gripe about bad interpretations , look at the underlying decision justifying Citizen's United. It's based solely on a County Clerk's mistake in the case synopsis. Now we don't have democracy because it can be bought. And you're worried about guns...
RSS feed for comments to this post