UK Tourist Shot Dead in Texas Bar

[villager]

Source: BBC

UK tourist shot dead in Texas bar

(Mr Reeve, pictured with his baby daughter, died in hospital)

A British tourist has been shot dead in a bar in the United States.

Thomas Reeve was killed when a man entered the bar in Amarillo, Texas, and opened fire, says a local report.

A 48-year-old man was shot in the hand and a woman sexually assaulted, says the report. A 25-year-old man has been arrested by police, it adds. Mr Reeve's parents said: "He was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time." The 28-year-old, of Maidenhead, Berkshire, had a young daughter.

A family statement said: "Tom was a much loved son, brother and father who will be missed by the whole family and very many friends."

He had only visited the city where he died "because he liked the song" (Is This The Way To) Amarillo by Tony Christie, relatives said. The family is being provided with assistance by the Foreign Office consulate.

Mr Reeve had been driving through America with two friends.

<snip>

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8348249.stm

[AndyA]

1. Yet another senseless death due to out of control gun laws.

Thank goodness everyone was able to protect themselves with their guns and prevent this from happening.

[slackmaster]

5. Guns aren't allowed in bars in Texas

Do get your story straight.

[AndyA]

7. Where did I say guns were allowed in bars in Texas?

Do get your response straight and stop putting thoughts in to make your point.

I was referring to gun laws in general in this country, which are a joke. Want proof? Check the headlines from the last few days. How many more innocent people will die because too many people have guns that shouldn't have them?

[Pavulon]

22. What do you propose? EXACTLY

what should be done?

[AndyA]

32. I believe people should be checked more thoroughly before allowed to have guns.

No one needs a high powered weapon that can fire multiple shots through armor.

I think the laws on bearing arms need to be looked at again.

If you wouldn't trust a complete stranger to put your 8 year old daughter in a car and drive off to a point unknown, you also can't trust that same stranger to be near your 8 year old with a gun.

[defendandprotect]

44. I'd say only law officials should have guns . . . and our police should be de-militarized . . .

And, btw, just look at this military guy -- Hasan? -- not sure of the name --

obviously in high emotional distress . . . undetected by our own military?

And the gun shop dealer is going to recognize that?

The GOP has pushed this violence thru the NRA -- and any thinking person has to

see that this the NRA isn't about protection, it's about creating violence to protect

yourself from!!!

[bertman]

85. WOW!! I can hardly wait until ONLY the Police and Military have guns. Then our democracy

will be totally secure and we'll all be free from assault by the criminal element.

[Diclotican]

104. bertman

bertman

Many country outside US have strict gun laws, who in practice give just Police and the military the right to have possession of gun in public spaces.. And where even hunting is somewhat regulated.. You have to be member of a gun club, and have a license to hunt. And go true a rather strict protocol to be allowed to have a weapon at all.. And where your gun is to be kept in a regulated gun locker at all time when you doesn't use it for hunting..

In some country, like my own, the police are not set up with gun at all.. Well they Do have gun, but it is strictly regulated, and they have to get permission for every time they have to use it as part of the uniform.. And have to go true a lot of paper work, if they ever have to use it....

And compared to many country's of this world, we do have a LOT of weapon in private ownership, but we doesn't have the same numbers as US have, when it come to death by gun.... 11.000 it was last year, in US..

Diclotican

[caseymoz]

113. I think all of Europe should be under fascist control by now, then.

And be suffering the worst crime spree. Actually, that hasn't happened.

The NRA keeps saying that 500,000 crimes a year are thwarted by guns: I haven't yet found the source for their statistics. Granted it happens, but I would place it at 100,000 tops, and remember those who win the "dispute" with the gun usually report the crime.

[bertman]

116. Actually, it wasn't long ago that ALL of Europe WAS under fascist control. And guess

who came to their rescue? Now that the tide is turning, will they rescue us?

[caseymoz]

209. The Soviet Union?

Just joking, because your question is so beside the the point.

So, the tide is turning against us? So, Europe despite its universal health care and strict gun control laws isn't really fascist because we must have rescued it 70 years ago, so they might now save us from universal health care and gun control laws, and rule by a guy who only has a Certificate of Birth and not a birth certificate, and who doesn't have a racial profile a real president would have, which is what I'm supposing you mean by fascism.

I must now either laugh at you or consider your question highly rhetorical.

[bertman]

222. Since you are apparently oblivious to who really controls our nation--hint: it isn't the people

or our "democratically-elected" representatives--I'll remind you that there is NO NEED to save us from universal health care because we don't have it and never will; we already have gun control laws that are poorly enforced; and we are not "ruled" by our President. I'm sure all of that comes as a complete surprise to you, caseymoz, so I'll forgive you that you don't understand that a nation that is ruled by corporations is a fascist nation.

Now, back to my original question. Since the tide has turned and it is now we who are being ruled by the corporations, who will save US?

[caseymoz]

277. Not surprising in any part.

Neither that it would be true, nor that you think it would be true.

We do have a few things that could save us: one is that corporations fuck up, the second is that they have factions and power struggles, too. And, look, the all powerful GM actually went into liquidation and the largest financial firms nearly bankrupted themselves and had to ask the Federal government for a bail out. The fact that they had to ask and that the government could have said no shows that corporations do not own the government, even if they've infiltrated it, even if they have corrupted it. Something in there still works like a government.

Universal health care, we'll get it. I'm not saying stop working for it, but if we work toward it persistently, we will get it. Why? Because given the high costs of insurance, ultimately, other corporations will either have to pay higher and higher premiums, or they will have to face higher premiums and a work force that is less and less reliable and less and less productive. True, they could move jobs overseas, which is going to cut premium revenue for the insurance companies, who won't be able to lower them. Other corporations are going to get tired of paying all this money to health insurance companies, so, those companies will get thrown under a bus.

So, ultimately, the outlook for medical insurance companies is poor.

Meanwhile, as long as there aren't any more wars or terrorists attacks, ultimately it's going to get hard to motivate the right wing teabag crowd. If you wonder why they are so irrational and rigid in their thinking, they are acting like people at war, who mistrust everything as some sort of enemy plan. They see liberalism as duplicitous, as a means toward power.

Fascism itself does not appear to be a stable form of government. I mean, Pinochet's Chile and Peron's Argentina ultimately gave way. Franco's Spain was long lived, but only as long as Franco. And right now, I don't think you could have Fascism without one man rule. (And Bush, for all the damage he did, was not that man.) What we have right now is not good, but it can't be called Fascism.

So, whereas I could understand that you see the US government as being subverted by corporate interests, and yes, it is, I think also that the picture is not as dark as you imagine. Who will save us? I really don't know. Despite the way it looks, I am looking to see what Obama continues to do. If Europe does, it won't be through invasion or occupation.

[Go2Peace]

234. Are you a birther or did you forget the sarcasm tage?

Joking about the soviet union or your entire post?

[caseymoz]

271. I forgot the sarcasm tage. nt

[LeftishBrit]

326. It was never the case that ALL of Europe was under fascist control.

About 70 years ago, quite a lot of it was. This had little or nothing to do with gun control. One myth about fascism is that it was totally imposed by governments because the people could not or would not resist. This may be true with regard to the countries that were invaded and occupied; but in Germany, the Nazis were *elected* because what would now be called 'teabaggers' made up too large a proportion of a desperate population, lured into thinking that ultra-nationalism would solve their problems. The same was true to some degree of some other countries that had fascist governments. The important factor is a population ripe for the whipping up of xenophobic ultra-nationalist mob spirit.

'Now that the tide is turning, will they rescue us?'

Whom do you need 'rescuing' from? I would hardly call Obama a fascist; nor are you threatened by any other country that I can see.

[pipoman]

320. Posterior production of statistics

Granted it happens, but I would place it at 100,000 tops, and remember those who win the "dispute" with the gun usually report the crime.

you would, would you..100,000..based on what pray tell? What does that last part mean anyway?

Here's a hint:

* Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals at least 764,000 times a year. This figure is the lowest among a group of 9 nationwide surveys done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times. (16b)

-snip-

16b) The study states: “Eleven of the surveys permitted the computation of a reasonable adjusted estimate of frequency. Two surveys for which estimates could not be produced were the Cambridge Reports and the Time/ CNN. Neither asked the question of all ; thus, it would be sheer speculation what the responses would have been among those not asked the question. All of the eleven surveys yielded results that implied over 700,000 uses per year.” Table 1 lists these studies and various facts about their methodologies. Eight of the 11 studies mentioned above were nationwide surveys. Among these, the range of defensive gun uses per year is 764,000 - 3,609,000. The 9th nationwide survey is the one this study is based upon. It was conducted with the most precise criteria off all such studies, and estimates that Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals between 1,900,000 and 2,500,000 times per year.

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

[defendandprotect]

145. Any chance you might recognize the need to end the MIC . . . including Blackwater and

other privatizations of our military?

Who's in love with the national security state?

Wasn't it just recently used to make Americans so frightened of "terrarists" that

the Bush/Cheney creeps were able to bankrupt our Treasury with two wars????

Let's pull the plug on the whole BS -- !!

[bertman]

281. If you were addressing this reply to me, defendandprotect, the answer is Yes--a resounding Yes.

But the reality is that the people who have put together the MICC (I refer to it as the Military-Industial-Corporate Complex because it is no longer just the industrial sector, but all major corporate sectors who are involved) and who benefit most from having private armies like Xe, have been working on their "project" for decades and have become far more adept at increasing their power and control. So adept that the whole apparatus of government has been bending to their will since the early years after WWII. President Eisenhower's warning about the MIC was the direct result of what he was seeing and experiencing during his Presidency. JFK tried to put the brakes on it and was murdered for his efforts.

I'm open to suggestions as to how we "pull the plug on the whole BS" but I do not see how curbing private gun ownership relates to that. Please enlighten me.

[defendandprotect]

297. Actually stressing the corporate end of MIC does make things clearer . . .

Also, Ike had made the reference in his speech to "Military Industrial Intelligence Complex"
and Fletcher Prouty says that it was edited out and Ike put it back in and it was taken out
again --

So ... yes "CORPORATE" and we also have to be aware of the "intelligence" end of this creating
secret government --

And I agree wholeheartedly with this . . . and their desire for perpetual wars --
now two or three at a time!

the reality is that the people who have put together the MICC (I refer to it as the Military-Industial-Corporate Complex because it is no longer just the industrial sector, but all major corporate sectors who are involved) and who benefit most from having private armies like Xe, have been working on their "project" for decades and have become far more adept at increasing their power and control. So adept that the whole apparatus of government has been bending to their will since the early years after WWII. President Eisenhower's warning about the MIC was the direct result of what he was seeing and experiencing during his Presidency. JFK tried to put the brakes on it and was murdered for his efforts.

but it's up to us to change reality and I think that's why both of us are here?

I'm open to suggestions as to how we "pull the plug on the whole BS" but I do not see how curbing private gun ownership relates to that. Please enlighten me.

I didn't relate that directly . . . someone was asking what lengths I'd go to and that was my
response.

But -- IMO, torturing and killing animals also cheapens human life.

The only way the right wing can rise is thru violence -- political violence -- propaganda of lies
and teaching of hatred and exploitation of other humans --

Corporatism is fascism and we have a Supreme Court in place which seems hell bent on keeping corporatism going --

Keep in mind the Republicans tried to impeach 3 Supreme Court Justices . . .
Douglas, Warren - and Abe Fortas who they intimidated sufficiently with threats of investigations
to get him to resign.

We're way being on the SC thing and it cost us 2000, at the least!

[bertman]

313. Yes, it is up to us (and millions of others working in concert) to change reality, but

I fear that we have allowed a propaganda machine and a corrupt system to get too deeply rooted to drive out.

The people who feared and hated JFK are the richest of the rich. They can afford to buy media, to buy Congress, and to buy even a President. They buy their way into the bureaucracy by corrupting officials at every level, so that even when reforms are enacted they are gutted in the implementation or they are never implemented.

Your comments about the Supreme Court affirm my comments. Yes, the Court did usurp powers not given it by stopping a state election. But, our Democratic Presidential candidate did not even raise an objection. That's what I mean about corruption. (Of course, with Joe Liebermann as a running mate, what would one expect?)

Aside: I thought that Eisenhower wanted to use the term "military-industrial-CONGRESSIONAL complex", but the Congressional part was removed.

[defendandprotect]

315. Well, patriarchal violence has only been going on for 50,000+ years or more . . .

Bible was written to cement patriarchy --

Who's winning?

It's not the first time the propaganda machine has been working -- the Bible was still being
used to keep Segregation in place in the South in the late 1960's!!

Mainly the public has to be educated to looking more skeptically at what's going down.
This nation wasn't even acknowledging right wing propaganda until Michael Parenti began talking
about it in one of his books. You would look in books and never see "propaganda" in the
contents!!

They succeed thru political violence, lies and propaganda --
and I'd add "false flag" operations where magic acts come down while the
audience is enthralled - unquestioning.
"Shock and Awe" --

9/11 MIHOP -- Fake moon landing -- lots of other stuff.* Control of our "free press" --

Most of the thinking public understands that there was a right wing coup on JFK -- actually
a right wing coup on "people's" government -- and pretty much all the details of the whole
thing are out of the bag -- but no one really has the power to bring the truth forward.

And, yes . . .

The people who feared and hated JFK are the richest of the rich. They can afford to buy media, to buy Congress, and to buy even a President. They buy their way into the bureaucracy by corrupting officials at every level, so that even when reforms are enacted they are gutted in the implementation or they are never implemented.

Royalty morphed into capitalists/corporations . . .
but is the public really awakened to that as yet -- or the poison of the DLC-corporate wing of the
Democratic Party?

I'm just as scared as you are -- but I think we have to keep trying. What do you have if you give up?

Sadly, I don't see Al Gore on a pedestal as many here do -- and I think Lieberman/Trojan horse
was a great clue to who Gore really is. Would it have been better than this 8 years with Bush --
of course. But . . . it might have been an entirely bloodless coup? I don't really know.
Maybe the Bush years actually woke up a lot of people -- the hard way?


Don't know about this . . .
Aside: I thought that Eisenhower wanted to use the term "military-industrial-CONGRESSIONAL complex", but the Congressional part was removed.

Obviously, "intelligence" is part of the problem in creating secret government in America.
And that's how Fletcher Prouty told the story -- "intelligence" --




*
EDITED TO ADD that my opinion is that obviously fear is being used to frighten the public into
giving up their freedom. But, I want to point out how long ago this began in recent history . . .
that when they failed with the civil rights movement -- the best they could do was kill the
leadership - and in the case of women, threaten them with murder and move the movement into hands that would kill it.

TV has been used since the 1970's -- as well as periodicals -- to create visions of a violent
America. Drug war was used to add to that -- creating fear of one's neighbor.
Fear of those who were against the war in Vietnam -- "druggies," etal.
And they've kept escalating it -- TV ever more violent, movies ever more violent.
Getting guns into the population -- GOP using the NRA.
Pretty much using TV recently to create an acceptance and "necessity" for TORTURE!!

But, I also think we've had a lot of faked incidents -- perhaps like this latest one with
Hasan -- I would include Columbine -- and others like it. Oklahoma.

Impoverishing citizens, of course, does also create crime.
But the true criminals - corporations -- aren't held responsible nor accountable.

[bertman]

318. Here's an interesting tidbit of a quote from former House Majority Leader Hale Boggs:

"Over the postwar years, we have granted to the elite and secret police within our system vast new powers over the lives and liberties of the people. At the request of the trusted and respected heads of those forces, and their appeal to the necessities of national security, we have exempted those grants of power from due accounting and strict surveillance."

It's important to remember that this was the Congressman who was on the Warren Commission who stated that he regretted signing off on the Commission Report and felt that the CIA and FBI had failed to provide evidence that they possessed and that they had covered up other evidence in the assassination.

On April 1, 1971, House Majority Leader Boggs delivered a blistering attack on J. Edgar Hoover, charging that under his directorship the FBI had adopted 'the tactics of the Soviet Union and Hitler's Gestapo.'

BOGGS, who undoubtedly would have become Speaker of the House and a powerful ally in any reopening of the JFK assassination investigation, VANISHED on October 16, 1972, while on a military junket flight in Alaska. Despite a massive search, no trace of the airplane or of Boggs has ever been found.

Prominent "journalist" Cokie Roberts is Hale Boggs' daughter. Whenever the topic of her father being unhappy with the findings of the Warren Report she says she can't imagine where people come up with stuff like that. Well, you got to say that she figured it out pretty quick.

Edited to add: Newly-elected Senator from Alaska, Mark Begich, is the son of another Congressman who disappeared on the flight with Rep. Hale Boggs.

[defendandprotect]

328. Interesting . . .

Yes I'm familiar with Hale Boggs . . . and share the disappointment with Cokie Roberts.

I hadn't heard about Mark Begich's connection --

Thank you --

Whistleblowers have a way of disappearing in America!!

[Art_from_Ark]

331. Our Democratic President candidate raised many objections

starting with rescinding his concession to bu$h after learning about the shenanigans in Florida, to winning his case in the Florida State Supreme Court. But once the US Supreme Court decided the case (which was done hurriedly a few days after the Florida SSC decision), what was there left to do? No one in the Senate was brave enough to stand up for him.

[defendandprotect]

146. And the other inane idea ... that people with guns will win against our military???!!!!!

What prompts that curious delusion?

[smirkymonkey]

327. Yeah - I always wondered why some people think that could

happen. Even if you have 50 guns, you only have 2 hands and it's not like it's going to make a bit of difference when you're going up against one of the world's most powerful militarys.

[X_Digger]

330. Sounds like you're assuming conventional tactics..

Remember the DC Snipers? Imagine that x 1000 pairs of spotters / shooters.

Or, grind up an aluminum pan with a benchtop grinder, add finely ground iron, and a flash from a disposable camera wrapped around some acetone soaked steel wool. Place in a 2oz bottle and set it on the railroad tracks that service your local power plant, bringing coal to burn. Wait for a train to come, and set off your homemade thermite 60 seconds before you expect the train to pass that point.

Can't take the time to make thermite? Grab a chain come-a-long from your garage, or a 12 ton hydraulic bottle jack. Push the tracks out of line enough, same result.

Have some high tension power lines running nearby? Spend $3-$4 worth of bullets sighting in your rifle's scope on the glass insulators that keep all that lovely electricity from being grounded. Does the neighborhood next to you use aboveground electrical transmission wires? Those transformers make wonderful targets that tie up resources for an hour at least to replace.

Does your county store all of it's municipal vehicles in one place? How about the snowplows and maintenance vehicles? A bucket of sugar will go a long way.

Can you make a pipe bomb? No? I bet you can make something that looks like one. Go visit the port authority at rush hour, or speaking of ports, hit the ports of LA, miami, new orleans.

Go download plans for an ESN cloner from the internet and pick up a buttload of prepaid cell phones. Start driving around town, dialing 911 and chucking them out the window.

Got a UHF / VHF radio? Go pick up a crystal for a scanner from radio shack in the frequency of your local EMS services. Build a 5-10w booster. Bust open the controls for a streetlight and put the radio inside, with the antenna wired to the street light. Key the mic and walk away.

Heard of cell phone jammers yet? Some movie theaters are using them, and plans are available over the net. Same concept.


Anyone who imagines standing toe to toe with a government police or military force is being either dreadfully romantic, or ignorant. 'Armed Resistance' would be helped by small arms, but it's by no means the _only_ method of harrying / frustrating / compromising a tyrannical government. Especially so when those 'resisting' look just like everyone else, and fade back into the same neighborhoods.

[cosmicone]

228. +1000

[dysfunctional press]

319. that's a country i'll never have to worry about living in.

americans aren't going to give up their guns.
especially when there's no need for them to.

[JonQ]

50. Only police and military should have guns

they never misuse them.

[Lost-in-FL]

83. You forgot the :sarcasm: thingy. nt

[JonQ]

93. I thought it was blatant enough

especially in light of this weeks events.

But here goes:

[defendandprotect]

149. I'm ready to end the MIC . . . how about you?

[JonQ]

175. The motorcycle industry council?

I have no opinions on them either way and see no reason to end that organization.

[defendandprotect]

185. Yep ... that's what everyone thinks of when they see MIC . .. !!!

[JonQ]

194. I honestly don't know what you're talking about

what does MIC stand for.

[Jackpine Radical]

225. Military-Industrial Complex (in case you weren't kidding about not knowing)

[JonQ]

231. Ah, thanks, I wasn't kidding

I was thinking it had something to do with gun control.

[JonQ]

233. You think if we were to completely dismantle our military

(now that I know what you're talking about) we'd be safer? Because to enact what you're talking about we'd have to disarm every soldier.

How do you really see that going?

[defendandprotect]

248. Well, let's see . . . Did you feel safe pre-9/11 . . . like you were sure if the Russians ...

or the Chinese were coming that you'd be safe?

How did you feel when you realized NORAD went AWOL?

Did you feel safe in airports either pre-9/11 or after?

Afterwards, everyone pretty much acted as though they understand who

had really pulled off 9/11 and weren't very concerned.

Yeah . . . there's the show they have to put on - taking shoes - etal

but everyone knows the really story at airports.

Like guns -- the other weapons we invent to do harm to others actually end

up doing harm to us.

Do you enjoy the National Security State -- paying for it? Living in it?

That's how I see it going . . . downhill cause violence breeds violence.

[JonQ]

287. That's your proof that we need to dismantle our entire military

and unilaterally disarm? One failure?

I suppose then the cops should have been disbanded years ago, and congress, and the post office, and every institution ever created.

[defendandprotect]

293. 9/11 based Imperialism and wars of aggression = one failure?

Maybe you noticed also --

not only NORAD was AWOL --
but Pentagon had no protection . . . ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Cheney was being alerted to "incoming" but obviously let stand down instructions hold-???????????????

Defense of Capitol/Pentagon/White House air space just folded, as well????????????????????????????

Various airports just couldn't prevent four simultaneous hijackings??????????????????????????????????

General Myers didn't have the telephone number of Andrews A/F Base so he called a base much further
away?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

No one could catch a plane headed for the Pentagon though it had been in the air for an hour???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????



Read some 9/11 testimony and puke --

[JonQ]

325. So you really think disarming every soldier in the US

will make us safe? Cops too, because they snap and shoot people as well.

Wow.

I mean I knew there were people this naive, on an intellectual level. But I had never met one before.

[defendandprotect]

294. Let's withdraw our troops from the territories of other nations . . . a good beginning ... !!

[gorfle]

74. Well, let's see now.

I believe people should be checked more thoroughly before allowed to have guns.

The NICS system, which all people who buy firearms through dealers must pass, already checks to see if they are felons or insane.

No one needs a high powered weapon that can fire multiple shots through armor.

The second amendment is about keeping military-grade small arms in the hands of the civilian population so as to resist oppression by military forces.

Setting aside "need", such "high powered weapons that can fire multiple shots through armor" are well over 100 years old.

think the laws on bearing arms need to be looked at again.

What would you change?

If you wouldn't trust a complete stranger to put your 8 year old daughter in a car and drive off to a point unknown, you also can't trust that same stranger to be near your 8 year old with a gun.

If you can't trust a complete stranger not to run your 8 year old daughter over in the grocery store parking lot, you can't trust that same stranger to be near your 8 year old with a car.

[GreenStormCloud]

119. Are you aware that you suggestion would ban almost all hunting rifles?

Almost all center-fire cartridges will penetrate vests, except for the most highly rated vests.

In most states, if a stranger is in public with a concealed weapon, that stranger has been screened by the FBI and is extremely reliable and trustworthy. If I had to trust a child to a stranger (I will instantly grant that I would not want to.) then a screened CHL holder would be very high on my list of trusted strangers.

If the Democratic Party were to attempt to ban hunting rifles, we would lose congress and the presidency for two generations.

[Scruffy1]

148. Gun ownership

Being a past member of the NRA and a hunter and trapper I can tell you that the NRA exists solely for the benefit of the gun manufacturers not gun owners. Handguns and assault rifles are useless to sportsman and are simply dangerous to have around. The dumbest argument of all is that somehow you can defend yourself from an overreaching government with a weapon. Try it against an M1 tank or an F-16. Having watched gun violence destroy whole neighborhoods here in the inner city I think it is time for a hard look at our view on guns. The NRA uses racism to sell its viewpoint and its solution to gun violence is more guns. We also must realize that a large component of gun violence is cultural. You can't watch TV without being exposed to continual gun violence and I don't think we will ever deal with gun violence until we change our culture. This change will be a long time in coming, but I think as we become a more urban nation and the cowboy mythology dies off our culture will evolve and that banning guns will not effect the change that a cultural change will.

[defendandprotect]

150. Terrific post -- !!!

Your post should be permanently posted here!!!

And we can begin by ending the GOP/NRA reign . . .

[slackmaster]

155. Welcome to DU

Handguns and assault rifles are useless to sportsman and are simply dangerous to have around.

There are plenty of legitimate sporting uses for handguns, including hunting. Self-defense is also a legitimate use for handguns.

Assault rifles are strictly regulated and have been for over 75 years.

[GreenStormCloud]

159. Only about 20% of gun owners are hunters.

I have my guns for self protection from violent crime. A handgun is very good for that. I have a CHL and routinely go armed when I am out of the house.

My wife wants me to get her a shotgun that she can have for home defense. I plan to get her a Saiga in .410 bore. Since you may not be familiar with that brand, it is an AK-47 pattern, semi-auto, chambered to shotgun cartridges. In the .410 bore one can buy 15 round magazines for it.

[C_Lawyer09]

208. Are you an active hunter?

There are plenty of hunters whom hunt with large pistols depending on the laws of the state. For WA it is over '4 barrel and .25 calibre. A hard look at whose view of guns. I think I have a healthy view. That is just it, way to subjective an argument.

[C_Lawyer09]

211. Definition of assault rifle

Is it any semi-auto, or what calibre. Is my mini 14 I use for varmint hunting an assault rifle?

[Egnever]

246. Really? the taliban seems to be doing pretty well.

[bertman]

279. Scruffy1, the destruction of whole neighborhoods in the inner cities is NOT due to gun

violence. It's due to the conditions that generate such despair and hopelessness that individuals are forced to band together in armed bands to have any sense of belonging to a family, hope for the future, and material success. The fact that guns are readily available means that they are the weapons of choice. Without them there would be other weapons. It's a survival-of-the-strongest mentality. Nowadays, the strongest are those with the greatest firepower.

I do agree with you that TeeVee contributes to gun violence; however, most hunters and gun owners are responsible citizens who never use a weapon against another human being. It's the criminal element and the unbalanced who pose the greatest threat to society.

[slackmaster]

137. When you say "high powered weapon that can fire multiple shots through armor",

You have just described a hunting rifle.

[C_Lawyer09]

205. Please

What a load of crap, as I'm sure you've heard before a gun is an inanimate object. Try selling your opinion to an elderly couple whom stopped a violent robbery. You can't legislate total safety of everybody, that is just reality.

[Prophet 451]

87. Check your gun at the door

They knew that back in the days of Wyatt Earp. Any bar in a state which allows open carry should have a lockbox so you can check your gun on entering and pick it up on leaving. If you're blind drunk or frothing mad, the barkeep gets to hold onto it until morning.

[izquierdista]

125. De-nut the dumbfucks in Texas.

The line would stretch all the way to Georgia.

[imdjh]

24. I'm making juvenile noises and mocking you.

[AndyA]

35. Well then you've got all the requirements to own a gun.

Happy shooting.

[defendandprotect]

47. Fantastic . . .

[imdjh]

121. O yeah?

[defendandprotect]

153. Is that you?

[slackmaster]

25. Your reference to "out of control gun laws" seems to suggest the problem is a deficiency in the law

The fact is, the shooter in this case was a criminal in the process of committing other crimes.

I was referring to gun laws in general in this country, which are a joke. Want proof? Check the headlines from the last few days. How many more innocent people will die because too many people have guns that shouldn't have them?

Most violent crimes are committed by people who already have criminal records that prohibit them from having guns. The problem is not a lack of laws. The problem is criminality.

[AndyA]

29. So, let's just not worry about it then, right?

As long as people have a right to guns, it doesn't really matter that creates an environment where access is so much greater.

The price of a human life isn't much, right?

[digidigido]

36. Guns don't kill people, Sick fucks with guns kill people

[AndyA]

43. So we just do nothing?

Allow access to guns to remain plentiful, and allow the sick fucks to just keep killing innocent people?

The right for the sick fuck to have a gun takes precedence over the right of someone else to live their life?

[gorfle]

78. Yes. That is precisely what we do.

Our founders were well aware that people do bad things with weapons. This has been the way of mankind since he mastered fire. But they were wise enough to know that you can't take away liberty in the hope of gaining safety:

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

The simple fact is that over 98% of the 80 million firearm owners in this country don't commit crimes with their firearms. Yes, there will be people who use their firearms to commit crimes. But we can't infringe on everyone's right to keep and bear arms because of this small minority of people.

[AndyA]

88. Bullshit.

What militia are you a member of?

The kinds of weapons we have today didn't exist back when the founders made their feelings known. If people only had muskets today, that would be a different story.

As someone who lost a loved one at the hands of an idiot with a gun, I very much RESENT your attitude and hope you never have to see a loved one die because we treat guns in this country with such laxity.

The right to live comes above all else. Including the right to have a gun.

The Republicans appreciate your "as long as it doesn't happen to me attitude."

[GreenStormCloud]

120. You have already lost that argument. SCOTUS has ruled. Live with it.

If the change in technology restricts the 2nd to guns of that era, then the 1st could be restricted to the technology of that era too.

And SCOTUS has ruled on that question too.

Your side lost.

[defendandprotect]

143. Remember when we won an end to capital punishment ... that's been reversed ...

As long as you keep your right wing Repugs in power in the Supreme Court, you will

have your win and your way.

But, should there ever again be another period of Enlightenment and liberalization of

the courts, you you'd lose this inane argument.

The second amendment has an opening clause . . . which has to be ignored for the

GOPs/NRA to conquer sanity --

Guns breed death -- always have, always will.