Mass killings

142 replies [Last post]
lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005

Today it is a mass killing at elementary school in Connecticut.
Before that it was a mass shooting in Oregon. And California, And Colorado. And on and on.
Too many guns in America. Too easily available to the deranged, angry or anyone with a drudge. Or mad at a spouse.

And we are not supposed to talk about the gun issue. Republicans and Democrats are afraid of the NRA bullies and its followers. They will say today is not the time to talk about the gun issue. But there never seems to be a day to talk about the need to stop the gun proliferation.

We will soon hear from the NRA and apologists for the gun merchants that guns don't kill people--it is always something else to blame for these shootings.

Well now we have multiple schoolchildren dead.

What do I tell my children when they come home today from a school they presume is about the safest place they can be?

.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lion

The unimaginable. I join the rest of our country in grief. It's not just guns, but a culture of violence that we have allowed to proliferate. When visiting other countries, it is not unusual for young children to make a gun with their hand and go 'bang, bang when I identify myself as an American. (I have always assumed it was in relation to our popular western movies, but now I'm beginning to wonder.). Many prospective visitors question us about the 'gang' activity in big cities. Our American movies often glamorize the criminal element in our culture. I think the problem goes beyond the 'right to carry guns' issue.
My sincerest condolences to those in Connecticut.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
The elephant in the middle of the room

Mental health. Recognizing symptoms; providing treatment.

Kudos to teachers and school administrators who have plans in place to protect our children.
This small town shows that American neighbors provide support in a crisis.

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
A huge elephant

You've hit the nail on the head DM.

Quote:

Mental health. Recognizing symptoms; providing treatment.

The way we treat our mentally ill in this country is criminal. Often they are denied treatment cause they can't pay. And then there is the other side of the coin where people with mental illness can not be forced to receive treatment until they have shown that they are a threat to themselves or others. Sometimes that's too late.

http://now.msn.com/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother-says-mom-of-mentally-ill-son

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
G35 Dude

Thanks for sharing this article!!

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
DM- i think youre right

it is a modern culture of violence. Guns have been in households and available to children for the stealing since there has been an america. But the mass killings really only began with any significant numbers after the 1960's. There have always been guns, but not always mass public shootings. whats changed?

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Sick Minds

Too many sick minds in this country. You will never eradicate all of the guns by outlawing them, Lion. Only the criminals and people with sick minds will end up with them. The innocent will be left without a way to defend themselves. Just like the many unborn children that die every day at the hands of abortionists- they are helpless.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Meaningful action

Does not automatically mean 'gun control' as a meaningful solution to our national problem of violence.

After living in the south for a few years, I have a better understanding of the 'gun' culture of the south and . this culture is very different from the 'gun' culture experienced in urban areas. Guns are connected to violence, but violence is not always connected to guns. There are peaceful gun owners on our country. Changing second amendment rights is not necessarily the answer to our current problem. We need to look into guns in the hands of gangs and unauthorized militias - and then discuss 'rights' - IMO
We also need to look into mental illness; the culture of violence as portrayed in entertainment and its affect on our treatment of others. This is a discussion we need to have - and get expert information.

Eradicating guns will never happen. This is not the fight to engage in. The man who shot Brady had a problem. A mental problem. I expect to see some valid progress made on this issue. We need to look at the culture that is producing these 'sick minds'. This involves a lot more than Second Amendment rights.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Hinkley

Hinkley was found innocent by reason of insanity by a jury of 11 blacks and 1 white. Just sayin'

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
To add to this gun discussion...

...is also the oft-not mentioned fact that less Americans attend/are affiliated with a church these days than since the inception of the US. The wholesale assault on Christianity, and religion in general, are leading us to a Godless society and an erosion of basic moral beliefs and values.

To the Godless, sick or not, such acts are not without consideration. A man can set himself on any wayward path without guidance, and most religions provide a path of peace and morality if one accepts it, should they be given that option or education. This tragedy, as most I suppose, has many components that led to this end; I will venture to guess that there was little religious guidance in this boy's life, and the Godless child acted of his own volition, acting out on his own in a horrible, horrible way.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
Well said, DM

Whether it is guns, machetes, knives or whatever tool of violence is used upon the innocent, there needs to be a serious discussion about mental illness and also how we as a culture glorify those deranged individuals.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
.

.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Question for DM
Davids mom wrote:

Does not automatically mean 'gun control' as a meaningful solution to our national problem of violence.

After living in the south for a few years, I have a better understanding of the 'gun' culture of the south and . this culture is very different from the 'gun' culture experienced in urban areas. Guns are connected to violence, but violence is not always connected to guns. There are peaceful gun owners on our country. Changing second amendment rights is not necessarily the answer to our current problem. We need to look into guns in the hands of gangs and unauthorized militias - and then discuss 'rights' - IMO
We also need to look into mental illness; the culture of violence as portrayed in entertainment and its affect on our treatment of others. This is a discussion we need to have - and get expert information.

Eradicating guns will never happen. This is not the fight to engage in. The man who shot Brady had a problem. A mental problem. I expect to see some valid progress made on this issue. We need to look at the culture that is producing these 'sick minds'. This involves a lot more than Second Amendment rights.

Please explain what you mean by "unauthorized militia" and their use of guns?

Has there ever been gun violence by what you are calling an "unauthorized militia"? Maybe I am just uninformed, please enlighten me. GP

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GP

You're not uninformed - but you're in la la land if you think others are not aware of what is going on in this country.

All the organizations being 'watched' by our intelligence organizations are not armed - but some are; practice military maneuvers; and are considered dangerous - but easily rendered ineffective if necessary.

California has 29; Georgia has 30; and Utah has 3. (These numbers do not include suspected 'terrorist groups' that are not considered 'domestic'.) These organizations do not include the 'drug cartels' that operate in our country - or highly organized American gangs. So GP, if you are participating in a 'fun' military organization that is outside state or federal authorization - you're being watched while you have your fun.
(But I'm sure you are aware of that)

Quote:

Has there ever been gun violence by what you are calling an "unauthorized militia"?

Black Panthers; KKK

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
DM and Big Brother

So you don't have any information of gun violence by and "unauthorized militia" except you contend Government is watching them?

When is the last time the KKK was heard of?

Now with the Black Panthers you may have a point but really not much gun violence from them either.

We have lost many freedoms in the last 10 years, the Constitution is being ignored daily by Congress and this current administration.

Look DM, if relatives of Honey BOO BOO want run around in the woods and play soldier that is fine with me, I served my country Honorably and will defend their right to do all things legal and Constitutional. The only organization I would ever consider joining is Oath-keepers, here is a list of their 10 beliefs, I am curious if you would agree with them. The Oath Keepers feel that their sworn oath to the American Constitution, grants them not only the right, but the duty to refuse unconstitutional orders. The Oath Keepers organization has published a list of orders that they will not obey:

1)Orders to disarm the American people.
2)Orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people.
3)Orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.
4)Orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.
5)Orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6)Any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7)Any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
8)Orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control."
9)Any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
10)Any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

So DM what do you think, are these extremist ideas? GP

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GP

Are the Oath Keepers conducting military maneuvers?

Quote:

When is the last time the KKK was heard of?

When they were refused to 'add their name' to the maintenance of our highways. When they were sued for the death of an American citizen - which hurt their financial base. (And when certain other organizations using other names - claim the goals of the KKK)

Me thinks thou dost protest too much.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
DM Oathkeepers/KKK

Read for yourself what Oathkeepers is all about, if you are a military spouse ask your husband about the Oath, I still remember it and it was over 42 years ago. http://oathkeepers.org/oath/category/oathkeeper-testimonials/

As far as the KKK being an "unauthorized militia", I believe the organization can now be declared officially dead, best left buried in the past and hopefully to never rear its ugly head again. -GP

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Oath Keepers

My husband and others have had unpleasant experiences with SOME Oath Keepers. (Even during their service to our country while in the military) As in all organizations - there are those who have different interpretations of the implementation of their 'oath'. I'm sure there are dedicated Americans in the organization. Some members are not as welcoming TO ALL AMERICANS. Check it out GP. The same can be said for many organizations who claim allegiance to our Constitution.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
DM- the best I can come up with so far...

Is to pass a law saying that if you have a person with mental health issues, or a condition that can sometimes lead to outbursts of violence (like aspergers- which apparently had) then you may not have a firearm of any kind in your home. If you still want to own them, fine, rent a storage locker somewhere. Or, if having guns in your house for self protection is that important to you, have the person with the mental issues put in home or live somewhere else. You have the freedom, and you have the choice. But what you do not get to do is have a potentially violent unstable person in house full of guns, assault rifles or otherwise. the risk to society, as we have seen too often, is too great.I would be completely fine with that as a new gun law. Rights come with responsibility.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Renault

Thanks for contributing to the conversation - which is now national. We need to have all opinions on the table. Let's all listen and think this through. It looks like many are beginning to move in the direction looking at all possible aspects of a solution.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Do Criminals Obey Guns Laws?

Let's look at how many laws were broken in the latest shooting.

Connecticut law requires a person be over 21 to possess a handgun. Lanza was 20.

Connecticut requires a permit to carry a pistol on one’s person, a permit Lanza did not have.

It is unlawful in Connecticut to possess a firearm on public or private elementary or secondary school property, a statute Lanza clearly ignored.

It’s possible Lanza may have violated a Connecticut law banning possession of “assault weapons.”

Of course, these laws were violated because Lanza did not own any of the firearms in question, but rather stole them, and he clearly had no regard for the law in committing his crime.

Bottom line is criminals do not obey laws and never will, disarming law bidding citizens so they can not defend themselves is not the answer. GP

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Sen. Dianne Feinstein...

Stated today that she will introduce a bill to ban assault weapons. She said her bill would ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession.

So I guess making me criminal is really going to solve something. Yup the looney left is in motion.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Cy

Is a hunting rifle considered an assault weapon? Will the fight over Second Amendment rights
truly address our culture of violence in 2012 Lots of looneys using politics instead of thoughtfulf common sense

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
DM.. Culture of Violence

I hope not. However, listening to the "talking heads from the left" the theme of their message is overall gun control to stem "gun violence". To them, it's about all guns; be it a pistol or rifle.

But now we wonder, what bill will they pass to address this culture of violence?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Left/Right!

Political posturing!!

Quote:

But now we wonder, what bill will they pass to address this culture of violence?

What of consequence has this Congress done? Why do we have to WAIT on this non-acting Congress to act. Why don't we use the power of the almighty dollar and stop supporting violent films, games, TV shows, etc.? Why don't we get our PTA and/or parent groups to start giving workshops to parents about non-violent solutions to problems. Hey - for those who are still attending church - let's get some workshops in church that discuss non-violence. MLK/Ghandi changed the actions of a society by non-violent action. I feel it can be done. We may never have an answer on how we could have stopped the action of the individual in Connecticut - but teaching others how to solve problems/concerns non-violently may be a start.

Fighting over the Second Amendment takes time - and offers very little opportunity for changing a culture. With this left/right hang up - soon we will be a country of independents - who want to see action - not verbosity.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
D Mom

Agreed. If this crap is left on store shelves or not watched at the movies, video, TV or on-line the message would be be loud and clear. I'm sure that all the other actions you mentioned will make a dent in the problem

However, I want to make it clear that the fight is not about the 2nd Amendment.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Attack on the 2nd
Cyclist wrote:

Agreed. If this crap is left on store shelves or not watched at the movies, video, TV or on-line the message would be be loud and clear. I'm sure that all the other actions you mentioned will make a dent in the problem

However, I want to make it clear that the fight is not about the 2nd Amendment.

You can bet there will be an attack on the 2nd like we have never seen before. The propagandist left wing media will have guns practically climbing off shelves and shooting people! GP

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
2nd amendment

GP--The 2nd Amendment interpretation embraced by you does not mean that Americans cannot regulate guns to provide for a safer society for our citizens. If we can require measures for automobile safety to make cars less a danger to everyone, we can certainly regulate the gun traffic to make us safer also.

A man in Indiana was arrested on Saturday threatening a nearby elementary school. Police found 47 weapons in his home. Just exercising his 2nd Amendment rights I guess.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
Whoo-Hoo! Let's totally confuse the issue!

"Regulating" heroin, crack and crystal meth has worked out really well, hasn't it? Hey, they're illegal and so no problems, right? We banned them and we're all so much safer for it. The War on Drugs is a huge winner! The War on Alcohol was another triumph for this country. The War on Guns.....how can it fail? Looking at the past history, seems like it should be a raving success. How can anyone be this ignorant?

We as a society have a duty to do a helluva better. Unfortunately, asinine people with no intelligence whatsoever are going to make coming to cultural solutions very difficult because they are spineless pieces of trash that want the government to tell them what to do 24/7 and take care of them. They are way too feeble-minded to decide anything for themselves and want the gov't to tell them how to think and act.

When people think that all you need are some new laws to solve problems, you have a bigger problem than can be imagined. Unfortunately, the US is in that boat right now.

rolling stone
rolling stone's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/08/2012
Assault weapons should be locked up.

The killer in CT shot the victims multiple times with an assault rifle as he had several large capacity clips. There is no doubt that this weapon contributed to the amount of victims. He went to war and dressed the part. I would propose to stop the sale of these weapons to civilians and let the existing ones as they are. Their value would skyrocket and because of their high value they would be locked up where they belong. The second amendment was written to protect the free state by a well organized militia, not to enable a single individual to terrorize a populace.
Connect the points and you get a linear progression: a male with mental/personality disorders, a lack of empathy, easy access to weapons and a society steeped in violent cultures: wars without purpose or endings, video games and movies full of gratuitous gore.
That is the long version. The short version is that humans are reaping the results of unconscious actions. People at peace do not do or enable these things.

ptctaxpayer
ptctaxpayer's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/23/2005
Mrs. Lanza's guns should have been locked up

Come on Rolling Stone, get yourself a set of rubber sheets. The lady had weapons (I'm ok with that). But she didn't have them locked up or even have a trigger lock. This is after years of emergency interventions for a very disturbed young boy. She was nuts. If she had followed MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS, this never would have happened. They always tell you to lock up the chamber, lock up the trigger or put 'em in a safe. A lot of people don't. But when you have a mentally disturbed social misfit living with you, you better lock 'em up or get rid of them.

rolling stone
rolling stone's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/08/2012
ptctaxpayer

As country kids we were shooting guns at 10 years old, about the time I quit wetting the bed. Assault type weapons have joined the ranks of dynamite, too dangerous for the general public to possess.

ptctaxpayer
ptctaxpayer's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/23/2005
Rolling Stone--- very

Rolling Stone--- very persuasive counter argument ! Well done. We'll just disagree on this one.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
PTCtaxpayer- what would locks have done?

He killed his mother with her guns after he stole them. if they had been locked up, You think he couldnt have gotten a kitchen knife, stabbed her to death and taken the keys? trigger locks and safes are meant to defeat small children from accidentally harming themselves. They are not meantto, or capable of, defeating determined, deranged murderers. Having the guns locked would not have prevented this tragedy.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
NUK_1 - It's not about

solving problems, it's about controlling human freedom and saving us all from the ignorance of the masses. Socialist are all elietists. Stop confusing them with facts and history that they choose to ignore.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
Lion- its worth noting

that with very few exceptions, all of these mass shootings happen in "gun free" zones. Apparently, criminals do not bother complying with the rules everyone else follows. Weird, huh? As far as your "too much access" argument goes, I'm sure that was the same theory they used to ban drugs. Did that stop criminals from engaging in drug trafficing? No. That was the theory they used to ban alcohol in the 20's. Did that stop criminals from engaging in bootlegging? No. In fact, it could be argued that the wolstead act did more to grow organized crime in this country than anything else. When they banned guns in chicago and all of austrailia, gun crime went UP! More americans die in chicago in an average month due to guns than do in afghanistan. But its not the law abiding citizens doing the shooting. Banning guns will not do anything to get guns out of criminals hands. There is a problem, clearly. but banning guns is not the solution.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Renault
Quote:

More americans die in chicago in an average month due to guns than do in afghanistan

Two different gun related problems - Sandy Hook School/ Street corners of Chicago. Thanks for making it apparent that there is not one solution

Let's hope we as Americans don't get sidestepped in a political policy, and make our leaders look for solutions to the problems that we are confronted with. Guns in the hands of gangs and unauthorized militias must be addressed.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
DM- different problems

yes they are, i was just trying to illustrate that even in chicago or D.C., place with very aggresive gun laws, you are not immune to gun violence, therefore this problem canot be solved with more gun laws. Weve tried that for decades and it hasnt worked, even according to DEA and FBI stats. We need to take a different approach. I love Reagan, but his absolute slashing of funding for mental care in this country was not his finest moment.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Renault

We're on the same page.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Question DM
Davids mom wrote:

Guns in the hands of gangs and unauthorized militias must be addressed.

What is an "unauthorized militia"?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SL - an answer given to me by a law enforcement officer

What is an "unauthorized militia"?

A 'gang' with a different purpose.

SPQR
SPQR's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/15/2007
unauthorized.wait a minute

I think that was king George's view

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SPQR

Yup. So we have elections. I guess some feel if they don't get their way - they can use their militia to take over.
When they have elections in other countries - and the elected persons don't like what the people are asking for, they use the army to quiet the citizens protest. Except for the Civil War, we have been able to use the ballot to voice our protest. Are there militias who are ready to overturn the voter's choice?

SPQR
SPQR's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/15/2007
DM

They have elections all over the place North Korea, Russia,etc

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
So Dm...

If I have a bunch of guys and we practice maneuvers and ambushes while wearing camo and train with automatic guns this is a gang to you?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SL

You don't have to worry about little 'ole me. Now the CIA/or appropriate intelligence agency - that's another story . They classify your actions as possible domestic terrorists.. You're reallyl dence if you don't understand that. Is your ego in such need that you need to advertise unauthorized activity? (With real weapons). You and your buddies have fun! Now comes the denial. Bye! LOL

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Speaking of dense......
Davids mom wrote:

You're reallyl dence if you don't understand that.

dense: adjective; stupid; slow-witted; dull (In DM's case)

Speaking of unauthorized militia: Obama’s “Civilian National Security Force”

Other countries have, or had, their national security forces. Countries like the old Soviet Union, Cuba, China, North Korea, and Venezuela, and in the past, Hitler’s own “SS,” and let us not forget the Iranian “Revolutionary Guard.” Glancing over this list of nations…did you happen to notice any similarities among them?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
JOE - Nice try

Now Joe and his followers will say that Factcheck.org is owned by the 'oppressors' - but here it is:

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/11/obamas-national-security-force/

This is one of the reasons that Obama won - such outright lies by the radical right. There are real issue differences - why is it necessary to lie?

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
DM Factcheck.org and LIES?

Is this the same fact-check that is funded by the Annenberg Foundation that has Bill Ayers as a member and is funded by George Soros? I am sure they are fair and not a leftist radical bunch.....right.

What "Outright Lies" are you talking about, are you talking to yourself in the mirror?

Here is Obama's EXACT quote, I think he expresses himself well but maybe I misunderstood, maybe a leftist like yourself can tell me what he is really thinking?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s
Verbatim: "We can not continue to rely only on our MILITARY in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We have got to have a CIVILIAN NATIONAL SECURITY FORCE that is JUST AS POWERFUL, JUST AS STRONG, JUST AS WELL FUNDED."

I don't want to hear that he was talking about the peace corp or something similar, he was comparing his CIVILIAN SECURITY FORCE to our MILITARY! The PEACE CORP IS NOT A SECURITY FORCE!

Now who is spinning lies? -GP

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Now who is spinning lies? -GP

YOU!

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
DM No Answer?

What was Obama speaking of in the video clip above, please explain it to me if you know. GP

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GP - Answer (submitted twice)

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/11/obamas-national-security-force/

But you and others don't care to accept facts - only twisted interpretations as found on the internet. We've got your number!! #1 - radical and wrong citizens.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
DM Listen to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

Factcheck's answer is that this is, quote "Obama’s call for doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service."

100% BS answer, he is not speaking of the peace corp and you know and the American people know it. -GP

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GP

You're being laughed at! I know you don't give credence to Factcheck.org - but very few Americans give credence to YOUTUBE!! That is an entertainment website! Have a nice day!

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
DM Credence to YouTube?????

Well....His Lips are Moving and it sure looks like Obama!

Are you saying these are not Obama's own words on the linked YouTube video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s -GP

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GP - I'm saying

I give more credence to the answer given on Factcheck.org than the interpretation of an edited clip from YOUTUBE.
But you and yours continue to believe what you want to believe - like Romney would win the election. Continue believing your biased sources.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Yep Factcheck is SO balanced...

I mean after all the lie of the year was Romney's Jeep statement.. Not Benghazi... Yeah Factcheck is my source of choice.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
The American people believed Chrysler and GM - SL
kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Read this truth, DM...

...about the 'saved' auto industry. After WE lose billions supporting unions, GM will NEVER restructure and operate any differently than in the past as long as they know the Gov't will screw taxpayers and bail them out.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/12/20/the_auto_bailout_fa...

Please do read 'Why Companies Fail' in the March 2012 issue of The Atlantic. GM is the main feature. Oh, and it's a very liberal rag, so please don't think it's a George Will publication. Oh, here; let me help:

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/03/why-companies-fail/3...

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
KC

There are always different interpretations to ones 'truth'. The workrers who went back to work also went to vote.
(And were able to celebrate the holiday - that's their 'truth '.)

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Thank you, DM...

...for admitting their vote was bought with taxpayer money, just like the Hispanics with deportation moratorium 'bribe'. If you'd read the Atlantic article, you might be enlightened on why the bailout was so ill-advised, but then again we know why it happened - Chicago-style politics at its finest.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GP - AND THOSE WHO DON'T WANT TO CLICK THE LINK

Here is the relevant portion of what Obama actually said, with the sentences quoted selectively by Broun and others in bold.

Obama, July 2, Colorado Springs, CO: [As] president I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots [from 75,000] and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals, like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their effort connected to a common purpose.

People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer. So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We’ll call on Americans to join an energy corps, to conduct renewable energy and environmental clean-up projects in their neighborhoods all across the country.

We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we’re going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set.

We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You’ll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You’ll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.

This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up.

Does that sound like a force that could kick down your door in the middle of the night and haul you off to a Gulag or concentration camp? You decide.

CLICK THE LINK in a previous post if you want to see the 'bold' statements.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
DM who determined Paragraphs?

In the following, there was no pause between:

"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set."

AND

"We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

But your quote shows an end and a new paragraph which would tend to disassociate the civilian force and military part of the quote, this is simply someone spinning words and attempting to either walk it back or deceive!

Watch for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

Obama is making the statement that:

"We've got to have a CIVILIAN SECURITY FORCE that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded, AS OUR MILITARY!"

You and other leftist's can try to spin this differently but that is EXACTLY what he said and I take him on his word. -GP

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GP. Interesting what you don't address. Militias?
Quote:

DM who determined Paragraphs?

The radical right who helped Romney lose. Taking 'quotes' out of context and pitting it on YouTube is old hat - but those who can read and comprehend will see through your attempt to color the truth.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
DM The Truth

I think most can listen and comprehend Obama's own words:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

That is the truth. GP

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
The "TRUTH" she don need no stinkn truth...

...GP the majority of us know exactly what the "0" said and more importantly, what he meant.
DM is a shrill for her party so no amount "facts and evidence" including his own words will change that.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
GP - obama is a pathological liar

He lies on a daily basis and we all know that his real goal is to diminish all hardworking Americans in any way he can. He promised unity, he brought division. He promised to reduce the deficit, and he more than doubled it. He promised tranparency, he works in secrecy.

He's really a pathetic excuse for a human being. He takes a tragedy like the recent mass murder and tries to use it for politcal benefit.
Just like he did with the victims of hurricane Sandy. He flew up for the photo op right before the election and then does nothing.

The guy just has no moral compass whatsoever.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Joe K Liar?

Narcissistic Marxist Statist syndrome would explain his actions better than his being a simple Pathological liar. -GP

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Really wow I just described my PAINTBALL team DM....

we must be sum terrorist fer sure.

I will be sure to them this weekend that the Gubment will be watching dem.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Good for you SL

Have fun with your automatic paintball weapons.. We all feel safer with somebody of your caliber protecting us!

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Why Thank you Dm...

...you could do a lot worse then having me protect you after all being a retired LEO, SWAT Team Leader, counter-sniper and CQB instructor I feel fairly qualified to not only protect you but myself as well.. Sleep well DM.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SL

.ah . There I go again, messing with that testosterone. Real men don't have to brag. I have a son who is a range master, SWAT member, for a large urban police department. ( a BA in Criminal Justice and a MA in Education). I am no slouch myself at the range. Nor are my husband and other son. They and others are well qualified to protect me - but thanks for the offer.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
So.... doing the same thing

is OK if you do it...? Wow...You should learn something from David then since he is so qualified.

Hitting the paper is not the same there DM but then you have never been there or done that so....

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
Killings

When gun control advocates urge action after another mass killing, the reaction is usually of two types:

1) We are helpless because there will always be evil, sick, angry people who will find a weapon and do what they want. I think this is pathetic. There are sick, etc. people in other countries but mass killings occur much more often in the USA than in other countries. We are not helpless and need to address a terrible problem. Part of the problem is that there too many guns, too easily available in America. Why make it easier and easier for them to get weapons of mass killing? There is no reason for any civilian to own an assault weapon of any kind whose purpose is just to kill as many people as possible.

2) The other reaction is that we need to arm everyone, teachers, students, shoppers, church goers, so when a killer appears with his deadly weapon, someone can spring immediately into action and take the killer down. Sort of like Clint Eastwood. This is just a juvenile fantasy promoted by the NRA and the gun lobby to sell more guns. I suppose teachers should wear a loaded side-arm at all times. Silly.

Also we need to reverse the dangerous movement by the gun-carry lobby and the NRA to allow guns to be carried almost everywhere--bars, schools, colleges, churches, airports, National Parks. Foolish and dangerous. We do not live in some fantasy wild West movie.

Enough for now.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Lion - Your arguments

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - CS Lewis

“Mass killers are extremely deliberate and determined and, no pun intended, dead set on murders,” said [James Alan]Fox, whose books include “Extreme Killing: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder.” “They will find the weapons they need regardless of what impediments we put in front of them. It’s not an impulsive act.”

I choose freedom to defend myself and my family. Reference the 2nd Amendment, it's part of the Bill of Rights. For a reason Lion.

mudcat
mudcat's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
I'll go with #2 - armed teachers

It is not a silly idea at all. Ask yourself how many convenience store and liquor store robberies end up with a dead thug and no one else hurt - Many do. The private business owners who operate those things know - absolutely know for sure that someday an armed thug is going to show up and demand money or goods. Do they lobby their Congressman for gun controls? No, they arm and hopefully train their employees. They don't have to wait for government to act - they defend themselves with the weapons allowed by the Second Amendment.

Now ask yourself how many school and shopping center shootings end up the same way - dead thug, no one else hurt - like never. Because no one besides the shooter has a gun. Because it is a "Gun-free zone" Wow, that's a real deterrant.

Of course once again government is the problem because government runs our schools. We can wait for Arne Duncan and President Obama to reinstate the school security dollars they took away over the last few years (I bet this will not be reported by the mainstream media) or we can rely upon our locally elected school board to come up with a safety and security plan. How many more will die while we are waiting for this to happen?

State government may be the actual solution. They could craft a new gun licensing law that requires or encourages teachers to be armed and provide specialized training before they can carry (concealed is best - keep the would-be thugs guessing). And why not expand that to college professors who don't spout liberal crap all the time. Airline pilots, bus drivers, shopping mall employees, etc. If you know a crime is likely to happen somewhere at sometime in the future, you put trained and armed people there. How is this any different than having armed air marshals on airplanes?

Do you think any of the parents of those 20 kids would have objected to the principal or one of the teachers shooting this thug early on and saving their child's life? We have already read that the principal and one teacher were moving toward the shooter to stop him. Of course they needed to have a gun handy in order to do that but they can't have one because they work in a gun-free zone. What stupidity.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
Lion - ill take option two.......

Cops and soldiers expect that they may die in the line of duty. I know, I was one. Now it seems, we can add public school teachers to that list. But, maybe if the teachers or the principal had been allowed to carry, they wouldnt have HAD to die in the line of duty and 20 kids would still be alive. Cops and soldiers accept that risk, but they get guns to defend themselves with. If they didnt, Im sure recruiting would be a slightly harder job. Parents turn their kids over to me ( a current public school teacher) every day expecting me to keep them safe. If I am expected by society to keep them safe and risk my life doing so, why cant I have the right tools for the job, the same tools that everyone else in my situation (expected to defend others with my life) gets?

Richard Ford
Richard Ford's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/25/2006
Lion

I would like to ask you simple question. No sarcasm, just a valid question.

What is the problem with allowing teachers that have the proper certification and training to carry weapons in the schools??

I would go so far as to say that they should be required to have the same weapons training that our school resource officers are required to have. With that training, I see no difference between a resource officer and a teacher.

Our current resource officers carry their weapons in the school and I do not see wide spread panic there.

Just a valid observation.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Richard Ford

Excellent question. Some teachers do have training and certification/training to carry weapons. Some teachers have no desire to become a 'gun' carrier. One teacher said -

I made a decision to teach. In some areas, I would have made a better starting salary as a law enforcement officer. I am a teacher.

Schools that have armed guards do seem to be doing well. Resource officers/ teachers - two different job descriptions and pay grades.

Richard Ford
Richard Ford's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/25/2006
Davids Mom

Excellent point

If the teacher chooses not to do so, that would be fine.
What about the ones that would choose to go this route?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Personal choice

I'm learning a lot about the feelings of individuals and their personal choice about guns. I have carried - so I am not a 'no guns' person. I just feel at this point we should also look at what is happening to our culture - and figure out why we resort to violence first. (I used to worry about purse snatching - but now a criminal would just as soon shoot me for my purse.) Where does this all lead?

Richard Ford
Richard Ford's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/25/2006
Davids Mom

Personal Choice is the perfect line here.

Teachers that have the required training and certification should have the "CHOICE" to carry their firearm on them at all times. Even in the classroom. However, due to to mostly hysterical knee jerk reactions to bad events there are more and more restrictions placed upon the law-abiding citizens.

I fully agree with you regarding the need to identify why the "culture of violence" is growing. That is completely valid and rational discussion that needs to be had at all levels from the home all of the way to the White House.
However, with the vast differences in theology on this matter and the pace at which meaningful change comes about. The areas that are published as "Gun Free Zones" will still be targeted by those who wish to do harm.

Please have the conversation, but until the resolution comes forth, allow our citizenry every legal means to protect themselves and those around them.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Richard Ford

Gun free zones: Shouldn't our schools be free of guns - with the support of armed security guards and good security systems? Many schools already have this in operation - and school staff/teachers do not carry. I never felt the need to 'carry' while teaching or supervising a school. I worked in neighborhoods where I had an armed guard on campus - and a school that could be locked down. All staff were trained to seek immediate coverage wherever they were - and the armed guard handled the situation initially. This plan was put into operation too many times for comfort. I'm not saying this is the only answer - but a resolution may come from the conversation.

It is obvious that all schools today need this protection. Sad. Only once in my career was an assault weapon used on school children. This was years ago in Los Angeles when a vet had an episode and thought he was firing at the Viet Cong (they were children on the playground at 49th Street School).

Richard Ford
Richard Ford's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/25/2006
Davids Mom

While I appreciate your feelings here.
What is the difference between a teacher with the proper training and certification being armed and an armed security guard?
I read reports of the bravest of teachers that locked themselves in bathrooms and rooms to protect the children under their care, not knowing if the crazy person would kick the door in and start shooting. What if the teacher had a weapon to truly protect the children instead of locking the door and hoping he did not find them?
I pointed Lion to a story and I point you to the same one. In 1997 in Pearl, MS a student showed up at school and shot two people and then proceeded toward the junior high building to continue shooting. A staff member ran to his vehicle and retrieved his handgun and was able to stop the shooter before he entered the building.
I want all of our teachers to have the same option as this one did.
Security Guard, Police, Teacher are all job titles. Why should the security guard and police be the only ones who can be trained to carry a firearm in areas such a schools?
I am not advocating for all teachers to be forced into this, just simply be given the choice and opportunity. Nothing else.

Also, I will stand with you and help you champion the discussions of ways to reduce violence in society.

Be Blessed

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lion and Richard Ford

The conversation has started! The plea is to demand a plan! The NRA supporters and those who want total ban are talking! Let's hope that common sense solutions are found after listening to all concerns. Included and agreement seems to be improved background checks and training before issuance of guns; improved mental health treatment ; improved security for all schools are being discussed. If our failed Congress cannot act - our states and school districts can take steps to keep our children and communities safe. Lets keep the conversation going. Compassion and understanding has always led to meaningful solutions when coupled with common sense IMO. There is still a concern about military rifles and magazines. We'll see how the conversation goes. This may be the starting point of turning to a culture of less violence.

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
Ford

It is hard for me to answer your question without sarcasm.

A resource officer has a weapon because--HELLO-that is part of his/her job.

And teachers are there to teach.

The chance that any particular classroom in America would be the target of a killer like that in Newtown is remote--extremely, extremely remote. To suggest that teachers carry weapons just in the remotest of chances something like that would happen in their classroom or school is frankly dangerous nonsense. Where should the teacher keep the loaded weapon? On her hip? In her desk drawer? Hanging on the wall? And what message does this armed weapon in the classroom send to her students, including curious and sometimes rebellious teens?

The idea of arming teachers makes no more sense than arming all the clerks at Walmart, Target, movie theaters, mall stores, etc.

The idea of arming teachers is based on the crazy notion that more and more guns in the hands of potential vigilantes will make America safer.

We need to reduce the presence of guns in America, have stronger regulations over the import, sale, and ownership of assault weapons, license gun owners, and impose a personal property tax on all guns.

Richard Ford
Richard Ford's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/25/2006
Lion

Your sarcasm is duly noted and understood.

My reply is yes to all the above. I firmly believe that all citizens that pass the required checks and, I even have no objections to required training. I personally received my training from a lifetime of hunting and 10 years of military service before being medically discharged.

As far as sarcasm goes, please tell the parents and staff of the school in Newtown how remote the possibility of a killer on campus is.
Just because the possibility is remote does not mean you do not prepare for it. That is risk management 101.

I do not intend to argue here and am truly not attempting to belittle your position, I only offer my position and will defend it as you will yours

Larry Sussberg
Larry Sussberg's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/12/2009
FCBOE, ESPLOST & Elementary School Security

I am grateful that 5-6 weeks ago Fayette voters voted in favor of the Esplost and that prior to that vote, FCBOE voted to invest in new security systems for all of our elementary schools using Esplost funds.

5-6 weeks ago, some bloggers were calling that investment a total waste and mis-management of our tax dollars. Sadly, now it seems like money well spent.

Will it stop someone from doing this again, maybe, maybe not but let's deter anyone from trying. For anyone who has been to Newtown CT, well its a community similar to ours so this can happen anywhere.

Thank you FCBOE for listening to professional advice and deciding to upgrade security. It's unfortunate we have to do this, but it's a reality.

Also, this tragedy might be an opportunity to pause and reflect on a few things:
-Thoughts and prayers for the victims and families of this horrific crime.
-As adults, are we not responsible for role modeling to younger generations? And if so, some of what is said on these blogs are mean, cruel, at times prejudice. Just because you may not use your real name, does not serve as an excuse for making such unfiltered statements in an environment of "in your face, winner take all, and screw everyone else". Unfortunately we see this behavior all too much in Washington and our local politics.
It sort of reminds me of going to pray, and after services, watching people cutting each other off in the parking lot to get out first or ahead of another car they feel is trying to cut them off!

Ultimately, its not what we practice but how we live our everyday lives...our beliefs and how we treat each other with younger generations watching us as role models.

Just saying.....IMHO

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Lion, tell your children the

Lion, tell your children the truth. Our country has been taken over by moneyed up special interest groups like the National Rifle Association, (NRA.) The NRA dictates the terms of the gun laws in this country through a sophisticated network of political financing, sympathetic media promotions, and years of Pavlovian conditioning of its members and sympathizers.

The NRA takes no moral or financial responsibility for the deaths caused by their products. That’s someone else’s problem. They are merely an extension of the marketing arm of the industry to promote the wealth and well being of their industry.

When your children got to school, they are on their own, and that is a fact.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
Gort- is the NRA in africa and the middle east?

because there seems to be a lot of gun violence there and if libs cant balme the NRA for everything, whos at fault then? The NRA doesnt manufacture any products, so theres no liability to be had. they are rights advocates, no more or less than the NAACP or ACLU. Your argument is pathetic and derivative. We dont hold tobbacco, alcohol or automobile producers liable for deaths from their products, and any one of them kills far more people each year than guns. You arent complaining about them, why not? should we sure budweiser and ford anytime someone gets into a DUI accident? All products have the potential for abuse. you hold the individual responsible.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Ranault, I don’t think they

Ranault, I don’t think they need the NRA in the Mideast and Africa. They seam to be able to slaughter one another without them.

Actually we do have product liability laws. Sadly, they have been weakened by moneyed up special interest groups like the NRA.