Girl speaks out against violence ...Talk to her about guns, I dare you!...

[Acebass]

I'm angry right along with you Stacia...

Try telling this little girl we need more guns!...

Friday, April 21, 2006

Girl speaks out against violence
Stacia Young details night she was shot
By Jessie Halladay
[email protected]
The Courier-Journal

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20060421&Category=NEWS01&ArtNo=604210398&SectionCat=&Template=printart

Stacia Young is angry.

She is angry that she was shot last week while standing outside at 39th Street and River Park Drive, near her home.

She's angry that some people resort to violence.

And she wants it to stop.

"I wish … we didn't have guns in this world and people wouldn't have violence with each other," she said.

[SlipperySlope]

1. Dear Stacia,

Dear Stacia,

In this world there are a lot of people. Some of those people are good and some of those people are bad. You have to understand that a bad person will do bad things no matter what. They might do bad things with their fists, they might do bad things with their cars, they might do bad things with knives, and the might do bad things with guns.

But there are also a lot of good people in the world. In fact, there are more good people then bad people. And good people do good things, no matter what tools they use. That even means that good people do good things with guns.

I'm sorry that a bad person did a bad thing to you. I'm also sorry that a good person wasn't there to stop him.

Love,
SlipperySlope

[Der Blaue Engel]

2. Rigggggght. n/t

[Acebass]

4. If the bad person didn't have the gun...

She wouldn't have been shot, as a bystander. As was a 5 year old a week earlier while walking home with a relative...

People with guns Kill!

[EstimatedProphet]

7. You're right. I have guns. I kill people all the time.

:sarcasm:

[Acebass]

12. you wanna watch how you say those things...

http://www.a-laska.de/logov<1>.jpg

cybercops'll get you...

[EstimatedProphet]

13. I forgot the sarcasm tag.

[Acebass]

15. Love the eye of Sauron...n/t

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

72. I don't really know you, but I'll bet you are a responsible person

and not a psychopath, sociopath or a person with dubious morals and no regard for the safety of others.

Unfortunately, our current gun laws make it far too easy for many who have no business owning firearms to acquire them.

Where I am sure that there are far more people out there capable of responsble gun ownership, the effects of the few that are not can be devastating to a large number of people.

peace.

[Acebass]

80. Thank you !...n/t

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

192. You're welcome. There doesn't seem to be much "wiggle room"

for many gun advocates. It's as much a sacred cow with them as it is for the many people who advocate stricter gun laws.

It's just one of those topics that we, as Democrats, must acknowledge that there are many people advocating either side of this issue.

The point is: We should not and can not let it become a dividing issue in the upcoming elections.

I love Dean, but disagree with his thoughts on Gun Control.

But I would still vote for him again.

[EstimatedProphet]

228. Well put. Exactly what I believe

Unfortunately there are a lot of people out there that vote solely on this issue.

[Acebass]

271. would seem at times that sanity has left the building...n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

92. Too true, but the reverse of the argument annoys me

What I often see on the internet is people that assume that if someone owns guns, they are automatically violent, or at best just a stupid bigoted redneck shitheel.

Personally, I like to think I'm neither. And given the lack of actual contact with these types of people for the average poster, I think it's a meaningless assumption-one that says more about the bigotry of the poster than the target. Hence the sarcasm.

[Acebass]

100. On the contrary...

Most gun owners are law abiding good people. Some have guns for the wrong reason and thats where the problem lies...

Think of where the gun crime is occuring. Here in Louisville the majority of it is in the west end which here is the black area of town. Now with the support of the NRA they are frightening people into believeing they must arm themselves for protection, and support laws that allow them to shoot people on sight and carry guns wherever they like, using these statistics. All this does is put more guns into circulation and a greater possibility for criminals to get guns.

How many people have bought a gun because they have actually been in a situation where a gun was actually needed, and how many people, in that situation, could actually use it effectively?
There is no rational to the current gun craze, it seems to me to be a 'land grab before they close the gates' kind of thing. Let's get as much crazy legislation passed as we can kind of thing...

[EstimatedProphet]

112. And therein lies the real problem: the NRA

The gun fetishists-not just the owners-are the ones that try to push them as solutions for society's ills. And they are so effective at placing fear in people's minds that the fear stays with them, and the people act on it constantly.

Again, I'd love to hear discussion about how getting rid of corporate influence and the NRA would bring the country back into balance. They are the ones causing all the problems IMO, not simply gun ownership.

[Acebass]

137. It is much bigger than the issue here...

We live in a society of fear brought on by the fear-mongers...

A perfect quote is what Roosevelt said

"The only thing we have to fear is fear it'self - nameless, unreasoning, unjustified, terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance."
---- FDR - First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1933

[EstimatedProphet]

148. Absolutely. Perfect agreement.

[Acebass]

270. The ol bait and switch...

first you starve law enforcement, the courts , the justice system in general. Then you creat an economic climate that breeds mistrust and hate...then you throw in fear!...

what better way to get what you want, scare the hell out of em...

Someone mentioned earlier about criminals getting guns from the black market. I would ask them to define black market, because if it includes idiots who have guns at home that shouldn't have, I would agree.

The reason I use this story to make my point is because of the gun that was used. Granted they haven't found it yet, but I'd be willing to bet money that the gun was stolen. From someone's house or possible their car, someone who bought that gun for protection I'll bet. Wonder if they thought, when they bought that gun, that it would be used to shot little Stacia...

[Paladin]

113. Self-Inflicted Wounds

If you spend any time down in our very own DU Gun Dungeon (and I must admit that I used to spend far too much time down there, myself), you will encounter individuals who, while professing to be loyal Democrats, advocate the unfettered availability of machine guns and silencers, who promote ownership and use of guns by the sight-impaired, who brag about never leaving their houses without a pistol and several spare magazines of ammunition, who don't consider a rifle worthwhile unless it has assault weapon-style "scary" looking features, and who criticize the NRA for not being extreme enough in its advocacy of gun rights. And all of this is accompanied by a never-ending rant against the actions of Democratic politicians (John Kerry's campaign goose hunt, for instance), as opposed to a comparative silence about gun abuses by Republican politicians (Dick Cheney's quail hunt, for instance). And keep in mind, these are supposedly OUR gun activists, the ones who profess to be on OUR side.

Whatever bad reputation the gun rights movement has earned, it has earned it largely by its own actions.

[EstimatedProphet]

124. All right...

I haven't run across those people yet, although I've been to the Gungeon a few times. I don't know who the people are that you're talking about. If that's all they have to say, maybe they shouldn't be on a progressive board, beacuse that really isn't very progressive.

Am I posting anything like that? Do those opinions look like what I am advocating? Is there anyone in this thread that has posted anything like that?

My point is that I am a voice in the gun rights movement too, and there's many more that think like me. We're not trying to force the situation in the US to our will-we're interested in finding compromise for the benefit of everyone on this issue. We are disenfranchised from the organizations that are supposed to represent us (the NRA being the biggest example) in much the same way that progressives are disenfranchised from this government. And because of this, we think that the attitude of many people on the left that 'anyone who owns guns is an ignorant redneck' is somewhat knee-jerk.

[Maddy McCall]

131. Hear, hear.

:thumbsup:

[Canadiana]

134. Why do you have/need a gun?

[EstimatedProphet]

143. I have them because I want to

I have them because I enjoy target shooting. I occasionally hunt.

I DO NOT have them because I am afraid for my safety, or because they make me feel secure. I admit there are times when I have worried about the idiot right in this country starting a Kristallnacht for the 21st century, but that doesn't play into my thoughts very often.

Guns are inanimate objects. If they are taken care of (mine are locked in cases, unloaded) then there is no more need to worry about them IMO then owning, say, a brick. I have one of those too.

[Canadiana]

147. Let's just say...

Guns were no longer legal. Do you think you not being able to target shoot or occasionally hunt would be very determental to you carrying out and enjoying your life?

I really don't think anyone can tell me any real use for guns in America other than in law enforcement or the armed forces. To me, they just seem utterly pointless, so get rid of them and people won't keep getting shot.

[EstimatedProphet]

151. Would it impact my life that much? No.

While they are legal, I still want to keep them. Period.

The point that I have been trying to make in this thread so far, is that if we just get rid of guns, we're only treating a symptom, adn the problem causing gun deaths won't go away. Instead, it will cause a rise in crime using knives, clubs, etc. because the causes of the problem aren't being addressed. And if we're not going to address the problem, then what's the point? Assuming that crime will go away just by getting rid of guns is silly.

[hfojvt]

190. there is a matter of degree though

If somebody bursts through my door with a brick or a knife, I can pick up the machete by my chair and perhaps fend him off. If he has a gun my defensive chances go way down. Two troubled kids cannot terrorize a school very easily with knives. It does help if "I put down my sword and you put down your rock and we try to kill each other like civilised people" because it can make the difference between people getting hurt, and people getting killed, and pain is easier to get over than death.

[EstimatedProphet]

264. I'm not arguing that at all

and I am not paranoid about people breaking into my house either. I don't have guns because I worry about my safety. I have guns because I like to target shoot occasionally.

Guns make it easier to kill someone, yes. But not so much so that crime would go away if they go away. That's been my point all along-we need to treat our probloms, not our symptoms, and until we do we're not doing anything productive.

[converted_democrat]

183. I know 5 people off the top of my head that saved themselves from being

victims of crime because they were armed.. Only one actually had to shoot the person that was attacking, and the other four just had to fire warning shots straight up into the air, and their attackers backed off..

[enfield collector]

223. how do you stop the bad people getting guns?

even in the UK where handguns have been completely banned and were confiscated 10 years ago the bad guys have them in record numbers. Assualt weapons have been completely banned and were confiscated 20 years ago yet the bad guys still have them. Bad guys don't follow laws.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

225. Yoy picked a poor country for your argument...

Britain remains one of the countries with the lowest homicide rate in the world accounting for 853 homicides in the reporting period 2003/04 according to the Home Office's Crime Statistics <4>. At a population of more than 60 million that translates into less than 1.3 homicides per 100,000 residents in the UK. By comparison, in 2000, police in the United States reported 5.5 homicides for every 100,000 population. Both New York City and London have over 7 million residents with New York suffering 952 homicides in 2000 to London's 189 in 2003.

Simply put, fewer guns, fewer gun crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom

[billbuckhead]

29. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure--- Japan has no guns

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure--- Japan has almost no guns and almost no gun crime. Ireland is similar.

[Acebass]

35. makes for a simple solution doesn't it...

I didn't see anything about the NRA running anything in my constitution...

But it did say a lot about "We The People" ... thats me!...

[Jack_DeLeon]

60. Quite poessive arent you....

with comments like "My Constitution, and My America."

Hold up there buddy, everything is all about you. This is all of ours and we all have rights even if you choose to ignore that and want to try to strip everyone of certain rights.

Its funny how you can say things that are true yet completely miss the point.

Yes the Constitution doesnt say anything about the NRA, and yes it says "We the people," but there is no contradiction there clearly 2+2 does not equal 4 in "Your Constitution in your America."

The NRA is a group comprised of some of "the people." All people have the the right to freedom of speech, and as such a group of some of the people have the right use that speech to further thier cause.

And if for some reason you are incapable of understanding that let me use this example. The Constitution of the United States of America also does not mention anything about the Democratic Party either.

[Acebass]

63. and it's funny how you can twist words...

Some of the people does not make all of the people...look around Jack...your all alone here, got your hand on your gun? :scared:

[Jack_DeLeon]

178. Funny how you ignore points...

What exactly are you trying to there buddy?

Are you implying that "some of the people" dont have the right to free speech just because they are not as you put it "all of the people."

[derby378]

41. Japan doesn't have the same freedoms Americans have, either

And there have been too many reports of Japanese women being kidnapped from coastal areas and shipped off to North Korea as sex slaves.

So what's your point?

[billbuckhead]

49. At this point with the highest prison population of advanced nations

At this point with the highest prison population of advanced nations, to say America has all this freedom is so much propaganda. With the advent of the PATRIOT act, the USA is no different than a banana republic.

Then what about those dangerous Irish people? Again, much lower gun murder helps keep all murder down.

[Jack_DeLeon]

61. So do you supported ending the war on drugs?

That would do alot to reduce the ammount of crime in this country, it would reduce the prison population, and would give everyone more freedom from government control?

So where do you stand on the drug war?

Or are you one of those sheep that that just says "Drugs are bad mkay." Just like you do with guns?

[Acebass]

65. Don't change the subject Jack this is my thread...n/t

[Jack_DeLeon]

179. Its not a change of subject its dealing with the underlining issue...

Saying you can stop violence by removing guns is just like treating a symptom without curing the real problem.

Gun violence is a symptom of the prohibition.

Maybe you've got your blinders on and refuse to see that but that is your problem.

Why do you think that girls neighborhood is dangerous? Are you naieve enough to believe that it is so merely because there are guns. It is a dangerous place because there is probably alot of poverty, little education, and a drug war going on there. Ofcouse you would rather just deal with guns instead of doing anything to fix the real problems.

And of course this is "your thread," since you seem to have issues with control.

[EstimatedProphet]

97. No it doesn't

Until we treat the actual causes of the murder rate, we are only addressing symptoms. Remove guns from the situation we have here and we will see a rise in stabbings and bludgeonings-you can count on that. So if that's how the problem is to be solved, we're not solving the problem. However, treating the actual problem rather than just giving lip service to it and burying our heads in the sand isn't the way things are done in this country.

If we want to address why it is America has so many gun deaths, we should start at how guns are cultified in this country, rather than considered just another inanimate object. The NRA and the gun industry is where that comes from, aloong with a prurient media that feeds people fear of their neighbors on a daily basis.

So, what about those dangerous Canadians? They have as many guns in the population as we do-so it isn't the guns themselves. To believe that guns somehow make people shoot each other is ascribing mind control to inanimate objects.

[Acebass]

103. Is that kind of like the phalic thing?...

just wondering...:popcorn:

[EstimatedProphet]

117. There's probably something to that too...

[Acebass]

140. But what about the ladies?...

When you actually step away from the gun and look at it rationally, maybe it is the root of the problem...No phalic inference intended...tic

[EstimatedProphet]

145. .

:shrug:

[Acebass]

272. LOL...n/t

[Acebass]

64. And guns are the answer?...n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

96. What reports of Japanese women being kidnapped as sex slaves?

I follow the Japanese press pretty closely, and while a number of Japanese women (and men, too) were kidnapped and sent to North Korea, not as sex slaves, but to train N.K. spies to speak Japanese, this hasn't happened for years, and a number of them have been released recently.

I don't know where you're getting your information.

I do know that Japanese people are horrified by American gun violence and like their country's strict gun laws.

[Acebass]

104. That was North Koreans being sold to Russia...

http://politicalswitchboard.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=9388&view=findpost&p=51698

[derby378]

166. Apples and oranges, Ace...

A terrible situation, yes, but the previous report of Japanese women being kidnapped still stands.

[Acebass]

216. Wasn't really what the topic was about anyway was it?...

[derby378]

233. Why are you asking me?

:shrug:

[Acebass]

239. ?...

That was more or less a statement not a question...
The thread topic was about a young girl in Louisville Ky. that got shot while Standing on the Sidewalk as opposed to sitting on her porch Then someone said guns where illigal in Japan then someone said something about the sex trade and I cleared it up by saying it was Koreans not Japanese, then you reaffirmed that the sex trade still stands and I told you it wasn't what the topic was about anyway, and now we're here...

Sorry for the confusion...

[Maine-ah]

90. hows the sword crime?

[Acebass]

95. sorry Google didn't have anything...n/t

[Canadiana]

136. EXACTLY

I don't understand why ANYONE who is not in law inforcement or a member of the armed forces could ever possibly need a gun.

[Jack_DeLeon]

180. If you want to bastardize the definition of sword to include machetes...

there is some.

I also own some a machetes myself, I havent hacked anyone up with them yet. I've also heard of a few instances where someone has attacked someone else with a sword too. Most of the time I assume they are using those cheap $20-50 swords you can find at the flea market, as real handmade carbon steel type swords usually costs several hundred to thousands of dollars.

[Maine-ah]

279. actually, I think my comment went right over everyone's heads

LOL, oh well.

My point there was, so yeah, Japan may not have that many guns (tho I really just don't believe that one, but what the heck, right?) I'm sure there are other weapons available. Martial Arts, blades, ect... I'm sure there is a violent crime rate, regardless of they type of weapon used. It doesn't have to be a gun.

I have two guns in my house, I haven't killed anyone (yet.....)

[SlipperySlope]

108. Countries without cars don't have car accidents?

What is your point?

Do you think that "countries without guns don't have gun crimes" is a serious argument?

I'll absolutely agree with you, if there were NO guns, then there would be NO gun crime. Kind of like how today there is no AtomicPlasmaCannon crime.

But that doesn't mean that violent crime, crime, or suicide would go away. It just means people wouldn't be using guns to commit those crimes. And their are counterexamples; countries with high distribution of guns and very low crime rates.

The issue isn't the guns. The guns don't cause the crimes. The issue is the people.

[Acebass]

138. You tell me...

What are guns good for? What are they used for? What is their soul purpose for being made?...

[Canadiana]

141. Good...argument?

People use cars for lots of things other than getting in accidents. They're useful....some might even say "needed".

Guns are rarely used other than to shoot animals (needlessly, IMO) or people.

I understand that violent (gun) crime would still exist...but your logic is circular. The first way to change your gun mentality is to make it socially unacceptable to have guns. In Canada we do not feel it is 'our god given right' to own a gun. That mentality is the core of your problem.

[EstimatedProphet]

146. The hunting argument won't get you anywhere

"Needlessly" shooting animals is a strawman. There are far too many areas in our country that are overpopulated with animals.

[Canadiana]

150. Animals are a nuisance

[EstimatedProphet]

152. In a lot of places, they've become one

[Acebass]

155. But of course the Animals may think the same of humans...

just to be argumentative...

[EstimatedProphet]

158. OK...

Here's what the problem is: animals don't regulate their own reproduction. Predators do it for them. Now, there's no predators, or at least very few, in most of the US. This is due specifically to our actions. Therefore we have the responsibility to do the regulation ourselves. We broke it, we fix it.

And you're right that there's too many people on earth too. We need to do much better at regulating our population.

[Acebass]

159. I don't think you and I...

are all that far off in principle...


It's the other nuts we have to worry about...LOL

[EstimatedProphet]

198. Yeah, I would agree with you on that

And it's my personal opinion that we can all benefit and come to agreement if we keep our heads, and try to see that each other's sides also have a viewpoint.

I think the biggest part of the reason there is disagreement on issues like this is that, on both sides, there are people that only want to see their side of the issue, and dismiss everything else. For example, people who own typewriters might not look at them as anything other than tools; but if someone came along and harrassed them for owning a typewriter (and I have seen people called murderer simply because they argue for gun rights), they would be just as vehement about their right to keep a typewriter in the face of that harrassment. I think emotional attacking, used on both sides, is keeping this issue a hot one.

[Canadiana]

188. I was being sarcastic, of course!!

Animals must definitely think we are a nuisance for sooo many reasons....but that's a whole new can of worms. I still think guns have zero purpose.

[Acebass]

154. And I'll bet Henry Ford never built a car for it's kill ratio...n/t

[billbuckhead]

196. Guns escalate arguments into murder,lack of guns means harder to murder

Guns don't kill people, people with easy access to guns kill.

If guns weren't the greatest weapon for criminals, why fight so hard for them?

[EstimatedProphet]

237. Why not address why arguments escalate into murder?

Really, don't you think that if it were so easy for that to happen, that:

1) we'd see a lot more gun deaths from arguments in other countries? After all, are we really the most argumentative society on earth?

2) we'd see a lot more murders from bottled-up stress with other objects? This is also a society where we have people that run over people on purpose when they get pissed off. You don't think that would happen much more often?

My main gripe with the anti-gun crowd is so many of them want to just treat the symptoms. They think that by removing guns, the crime rate and the murder rate will go down, and until the causes of crime and murder are treated, people will still find a way to keep doing it. But the unfortunate side effect of the argument is, while people are focused on gun deaths and not on why it is that they are occurring i the first place, the causes are being ignored. I'm afraid that what will happen is that we'll ban guns and still ignore our real troubles, because it's so much easier to just slap a band-aid on our problems rather than seriously address them.

[Paladin]

245. And Where Do You Suggest We Get.....

the two or three trillion dollars it's likely to take to deal with all those "real troubles," given what Dubya's done to the national economy?

This whole "deal with societal problems but leave our guns alone" line is a deflecting device that's used quite often by the gun rights movement. It sounds good, until you give some thought to just how much money and effort will be required to pull it off, something the gun rights people conveniently ignore---kind of like what they do with the first portion of the Second Amendment.

People get into altercations all over the world. But the same arguments that end with fist fights in Sydney, Oslo and Osaka may very well end with fatal gunshots in Los Angeles, Santa Fe and New Orleans. We simply have too many guns in the hands of those who plainly shouldn't have them in this country---that, and a gun rights movement that is bound and determined to see it stays that way....

[EstimatedProphet]

260. And given the fact that they have guns in other places too

then it is simply not true that the guns themselves are causing the problem.

Again, if you treat the symptom you're not addressing the problem. You can't treat anorexia just by sticking a plate of food in front of someone. Why think you can get rid of violence in society just by taking guns away?

If you want to talk about reasonable control, let's talk about reasonable control. As I've said in other parts of this thread, I am all for that. I don't believe that everyone who can manage to walk upright after a fashion should have access to a gun. But there's more possibilities out there besides everyone has access to a gun/no one has access to a gun. That's a false dilemma.

As far as dealing with society's ills, we'd damn well better start doing it, and soon. I propose we do whatever it takes to do just that. Besides, Dubya's not likely to do that, or to do anything to reduce gun ownership, or to do anything positive on any front, any time soon. So, saying that we don't have the money to do it doesn't really go anywhere. We also don't have the money for the extra law enforcement that it would take to get rid of all the guns. How about we make an attempt at starting to address the issue by making it part of our official platform? How about we put into our platform that we want to seriously start addressing violent crime, and try to stem it's causes, rather than just say we want to ban guns so that crime will go away?

You said in another post that you thought reason taking over the gun movement was a worthy cause, but about as likely as seeing all children fed at night. If it's a worthy cause, then why not try to work toward it? People work toward feeding the children, and they make progress. The reason they make progress is because they don't give up.

[Acebass]

276. What kind of headlines do you think a drive-by debate would get?...n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

120. 'splain Canada, they have far more guns that us

2.5 per person to be exact... yet they have a ver low crime rate, and when it involves guns.... well they are shocked when they reach 20 murders for teh WHOLE COUNTRY.

[billbuckhead]

230. Canada has very few pistols and I doubt your overall assertion

Here's a link that says USA has more households with guns than almost any other nation including Canada and Switzerland.

<http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html>

[TheBaldyMan]

115. so your solution would be 'have more bullets flying around' ?

I'm sorry if this misrepresents your view but a bullet doesn't discrimninate between rich and poor, old and young, good and bad. To suggest that having a 'good' gunman or maybe some body armour would be better is unfathomable to me. She is twelve years old, she should be able to play and hang out in her yard without fear of gunmen, good or bad.

Stacy did say in the article that if someone had a beef with someone else they should sort it out one on one and not resort to firearms.

[wtmusic]

232. Nevermind that some "tools" make it very easy for a nutcase

to destroy someone's else's life in a heartbeat.

What a pantload.

[Keseys Ghost]

3. Was she quail hunting?

Just wondering....

[Acebass]

5. ...n/t

LOL

[Acebass]

6. Now that was funny...

I didn't see who that was before I spouted off...

Thats like giving your best friend the finger while driving down the road on a rage...LOL

No she was sitting on her front porch minding her own business...

[Keseys Ghost]

8. I only ask because, as we all know,..

...if Dick Cheney shot her, it was her own damned fault.

[Jack_DeLeon]

9. I'm sorry for her loss, but rights are more important than any individual.

We live in a free society, but freedom comes at a costs. There are risks associated with freedom, it is the price we pay.

All of life is a risk.

[Acebass]

10. I really can't believe you said that...

You understand this is the 21st century...this is American the home of the brave and land of the free...this is Louisville Ky... this little girl was sitting on her front porch in the innercity...minding her own business and was shot...a 5 year old boy one week earlier was shot in the hip while walking home with a relative...your going to tell me that these two children have a price they owe someone?

[Jack_DeLeon]

11. Thats life...

it isnt fair, bad things do happen to good people.

It sucks that it happens but do you think we should we all give up our rights everytime any bad thing happens to anyone?

You cannot have absolute security, so I would rather have my freedom.

[Acebass]

14. If thats your justification ...

then it's a poor one...

So we should just continue adding to the problem? Sell more guns?...

We can prevent this. We can come to our senses! But not until we get control of this country away from the NRA...

No thats not life, at least not in my America...

[Jack_DeLeon]

16. What is your justification?

Do you honestly think you can protect everyone all the time from everything?

Or do you just want to protect people from guns? If so then what about all of the other people who die or are maimed by every other thing, are thier lives not worth your protection too?

I know you cannot protect everyone from everything all the time, its a futile effort that does nothing but restricts individuals liberties.

Freedom is more important than security.

You claim that isnt so in your America, you must be a Bush supporter right. :eyes:

[Acebass]

18. Tell that to the people who make me wear a seat belt for my own safety...

I'm required by law to wear a seat belt, or be pulled over by the police, and cited for not wearing one, for my own good, but any pervert, future nut case and wierdo can buy a gun...


More guns is not progress...

[Jack_DeLeon]

22. So do you think it is a good thing...

that you are required to by force of the government to wear a seatbelt? Yes is a trivial freedom to give up for your own safety, I would wear my seatbelt even if the government didnt mandate it, but what other freedoms would you give up to the government for your own good? When does it become non-trivial?

but any pervert, future nut case and wierdo can buy a gun...

You are right. I'm one of the biggest pervert in the world. I do enjoy having sex. I also was able to buy a gun. Nothing is illegal about being perverted as long as you do not infringe upon the rights of others.

Some people would say that gays and transexuals are perverts, so do you think they should not be allowed to own firearms?

You are also correct, future nut cases and wierdos can legally purchase firearms assuming they do not now have any felony convictions or documented mental illnesses. Go figure that you dont considerder nor punish someone for being a criminal until they have actually committed a criminal act.

Everyone has the potential to develop a mental disorder, everyone has the potential to commit all kinds of foul horrible crimes, but you cannot nor should you try to punish someone before they have committed any crime. We are all innocent until proven guilty.

More guns is not progress...

Guns are inanimate objects. If you believe that inanimate objects can or cannot be "progress" that is your business. Personally when I think of the word progress I dont think of any inanimate object I think of thoughts and ideas in the minds of people.

I my mind when I think of progress I think of more people educating themselves, seeking out knowledge, and freedom.

The right to keep and bear arms is a freedom derived from the rights of individuals to protect themselves. It is a right that all humans have regardless of whether thier governments choose to suppress it or not.

[billbuckhead]

28. Widespread unregulated guns are a sign of a weak thirdworldlike society

That's why neocons are so enthusiastic wide spread gun use among the masses from behind their gated communities, bulletproof limousines and fortressed corporate centers.

BTW, the original militia in America has evolved into those poor guys in Iraq. Switzerland still kind of has a militia but Switzerland is very regulated place to begin with that is integrating into the EU.

[Acebass]

40. We've given up...

We've allowed Big Corporations to bleed the goverment dry to the point that 'protect and serve' is a hollow promise. Tax cuts and corporate welfare have starved our infrustruture till we can't even provide for our own protection here at home.
Is this the future? Not if I can help it!

[Jack_DeLeon]

46. Protection at home...

is yourself.

To let others protect yourself and your loved ones is negligence.

[Acebass]

62. No Jack!...Listen this is America...

If it weren't for people who think they have to have guns, those of us who don't like them wouldn't be forced to have them...

Where do you think they get the guns Jack?

From Idiots who think they need em for protection but end up having them stolen or better yet taken away from them and used on them.

[EstimatedProphet]

99. And Switzerlansd doesn't have the gun deaths we do

even though they are common there.

[billbuckhead]

195. But then there's billions in the third world living under gun terror

Switzerland is a well regulated nation with a well regulated miltia that is moving to the standard EU gun laws.

[EstimatedProphet]

229. Which only reinforces my point

The fact is, there is not a clear correllation between guns in the population and murders. It isn't that cut and dried. And since it isn't, simply saying that guns are the culprit and getting rid of them will fix our problem is not true. And, if we aren't going to actually address the problem, then what's the point? If we don't address the problem itself then we are doing nothing.

[billbuckhead]

234. Gun availablity lowers life expectantcy in USA and costs 100 billion$yr

Reduced Life Expectancy

The flashpoint in the long-running argument in the U.S. over the regulation of firearms is the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which states: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Gun control advocates read the amendment as permitting regulation of firearms possession; gun rights advocates read it as enshrining in law an individual's unfettered right to own guns.

While sensitive to the political context of the gun control versus gun rights debate, Lemaire stresses that what his work provides is data. For example, he cites a study from 2000 which estimates that the aggregate cost of gun violence in the U.S. is approximately $100 billion annually, or about $360 for every American. Given his background as an actuary, Lemaire has focused his research on life expectancy and insurance costs. His paper is based "on facts. It's an exact calculation designed to bring some more light into the debate.... I am providing figures that no one can disagree with," he says, acknowledging, however, that people "can certainly disagree about what we do with these figures."

Lemaire calculates how much time Americans lose off their lives as a result of gun violence and how much more they pay in insurance costs as a result. What is striking about both costs is how unevenly they are distributed throughout the population. According to Lemaire, all firearm deaths in 2000 -- that is, both homicides and suicides -- reduced life expectancy by an average of 103.6 days. Broken down by race and gender, however, there are notable gaps in how various groups fare. Men lose between five and six times more days than women: 166.8 versus 30.5. African-American men lose more than twice as many days as white men: 361.5 versus 150.7. The most significant gap, logically enough, combines these racial and gender differentials: There is more than a tenfold difference between days lost by African-American men (361.5) versus days lost by white women (31.1).

Lemaire calculates the annual insurance costs which can be ascribed to firearm-related deaths at billions of dollars. He cites statistics from a 2001 study by the American Council for Life Insurance which suggest that, at the end of 2000, there were 148 million group and 35 million individual term life insurance policies in force in the United States, as well as 125 million group and 8 million individual whole life policies, yielding a combined total annual premium income of just under $130 billion.
---------------snip----------------------
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/1214.cfm

[EstimatedProphet]

236. This doesn't say anything about what I am saying

Yes, we have gun deaths in the US, too many of them. Are they worse than knife deaths? Clibbing deaths? Purposeful automobile deaths? Dropping a safe on someone deaths?

Get rid of guns without treating the problem of why people resort to violence here much moreso than anywhere else, and nothing real will be accomplished. Treat the probelm itself (our fear, our need to resort to violence, our paranoia) and gun ownership ceases to be the threat. To argue otherwise is to argue that guns are capable of mind control.

[EstimatedProphet]

17. If you want to fight the NRA, I'm all for it

They are a big, if not the biggest part, of the problem.

But saying we should get rid of all the guns and violence will go away is simply unrealistic.

[Acebass]

19. That goes without saying...

I'm not nieve, but it put's a little more thought into. You have to try a lot harder to kill someone without a gun. A gun is instantanious bang your dead, end of story...anything else take a little more thought...gives the victim a fighting chance...how many hunters do you think there would be if the deer shot back!...

[EstimatedProphet]

20. Yeah, it does, but that still won't solve the problem

We have over 10,000 gun deaths in this country. The nearest country to us as far as gun ownership in the general populace is Canada, and they have about 100. Why is there such a discrepancy? It isn't because they don't have guns, because they do. If we got rid of guns, do you think those 10,000 deaths would simply not happen? I don't buy it. It's not that much harder to stab someone.

As far as hunting goes, what does that have to do with anything?

[Acebass]

21. oh but they do restrict guns in Canada...n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

24. Gun ownership in Canada is almost equal in proportion to the US

[Acebass]

25. Taking Guns to Canada? Beware!

Search
U.S. Gov Info / Resources
Taking Guns to Canada? Beware!

The Canadian government is warning Americans bringing firearms across the border, or even borrowing guns while in Canada, that the new Canadian Firearms Act applies equally to visitors.

Canada's tough new gun control law, which took effect Jan. 1, 2001, requires individuals to obtain licenses to posses or purchase either guns or ammunition. By Jan. 1, 2003, registration of all guns in Canada will be required. The Firearms Act regulations apply to the importing, exporting, possession, use, storage, display and transportation of all firearms, and are in effect across the country.

As of January 1, 2001, the procedures for bringing firearms into Canada, or for borrowing firearms while in Canada, change as a result of mandatory license requirements for all firearms owners and users in Canada.

Canadian firearms laws severely restrict the types of guns persons can legally posses. In addition, the laws apply equally to both Canadian citizens and to anyone bringing or shipping guns into Canada, or borrowing guns while in Canada.


http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa012601a.htm?iam=metaresults&terms=guns

[EstimatedProphet]

27. That's only sensible

[Acebass]

23. Canada's view on guns!

Canada's view on guns!
"Death's Door" by Michael Slade | 2001 Copyrighted by Headhunter Holdings, Ltd. | Michael Slade


Posted on 02/22/2003 11:48:02 AM PST by raybbr


The huge difference between the United States and Canada is the attitude towards guns. It's not that Canada doesn't have them-guns are around, although strictly controlled-it's that Canada doesn’t have a history of the cult of the gun.

In other words, guns aren’t worshipped.

The difference in attitude goes back to the American Revolution. Down south, the right to bear arms equates with the nation’s resolve to protect hard-won freedoms. The Stars and Stripes and the cult of the gun were born of the same mother. Packing a piece harks back to holding the line against armed Redcoats. North of the border, however, there is no history of revolution. The head of state-the queen-represents laws that been in continuous effect since the Norman Conquest of 1066, and perhaps before. The guardians of those laws are the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, direct descendants of the British colonial army, so in Canada today, guns remain where they used to be in America: firmly in the hands of the redcoats.

This historical schism plays out in many ways. In America, a gun is viewed as an “equalizer.” If a kid feels bullied at school or a laid-off employee feels unfairly treated, then a gun makes a good equalizer to get even with those responsible (and perhaps take out a dozen innocents for good measure). In Canada, those packing guns don’t carry them to enforce the unequal power given to them by law. Yes, there’s a limited right to bear arms-a right that says if you’re packing, you’re a cop.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/849485/posts

[EstimatedProphet]

26. I absolutely agree with that

That is exactly what I was trying to get at. There's several industrialized, 'civilized' nations that allow gun ownership within the general population, but they don't have our problems. It is because of that I say that if we ban guns, we will still have the problems-we have the problems because of something other than guns themselves, otherwise the other countries would have the same problems. Until we address the reasons people here think that shooting someone is appropriate, we will never fix our situation, and everything else will be just a cosmetic treatment.

Canada's control on guns is stricter than the US, and I think we could benefit from that, but the average person can still get them legally. I know-I used to live there. The article is implying that guns are restricted to officials. That's not true.

[Acebass]

31. When children can't go out in their neighborhood...

Without getting shot then we have a problem. The only way to come to a solution to the problem is for rational people to discuss things...you have come down that road...
What the girl said was true, we would be much better off without guns. Guns are a worse addiction than any drug I've ever seen, but at any rate I'm realist to know that it wouldn't be worth the live's lost in completely banning guns (all the rednecks say yeah). But there is no reason why every gun cannot be accounted for.
We can control gun crime if we control guns. If I'm in trouble I want a trained law enforcment officer to have the gun not some John Doe off the street who happens to go to the shooting range once a year. We'll get to the quality of police officers after we've taken care of the guns.
We need a lot of things before it starts to get better but getting guns under control is the first step in the right direction.

[Jack_DeLeon]

38. Its funny that you talk about drugs along with guns...

Most of the gun deaths in the US, and probably throughout the Americas, be it as the result of criminal actions or police action are the result of prohibition, this so called War on Drugs.

If Drugs were legalized people wouldnt be murdering each other over money that goes along with illegal drugs.

But there is no reason why every gun cannot be accounted for.

You mean you want the US government to throw away several billion dollars to register every single firearm in the United States?

Didnt Canada's gun registry costs a couple of billion dollars and it is still a failure. We have far more guns and far more people than Canada, a similar concept here would cost far more. So you would rather waste billions on gun registration, and invade the privacy of millions of Americans rather than to spend the money on something constructive like healthcare or education?

We can control gun crime if we control guns.

Gun control is all about control, so you want more government control in your life and the lives of millions others? Thats might white of you mister, you should be proud more government controls is something that all progressives can get behind right? :eyes:

If I'm in trouble I want a trained law enforcment officer to have the gun not some John Doe off the street who happens to go to the shooting range once a year. We'll get to the quality of police officers after we've taken care of the guns.

If I'm in trouble I want to know that I have the tools and skills necesary to take care of it myself. For the most part police clean up after the fact. Maybe you can go through live wanting to believe that someone will be there to protect you but I would rather go through life knowing I can protect myself, or atleast make a good attempt at it.

Additionally most real firearm enthusiasts are better shooters than police. Many police treat shooting as work, and will only shoot a few times a year, while many people into shooting as a sport or a hobby will go several times a month.

I laugh at your idea of "fixing" the police after you disarm or restrict everyone first. Thats nice backwards logic there. Just like they showed in New Orleans. Yeah its a disaster out there but lets take away people's means of defense and then we will worry about fixing everything.

[Acebass]

42. Drugs...are you talking to yourself?...I never said anything about drugs..

[Jack_DeLeon]

48. I guess its easier to make a lame comment and ignore my points...

than it is to actually consider them and respond intelligently.

You mentioned children not being able to go out in thier neighborhoods, you compared guns to drug addiction (I infer you are really claiming that gun ownership is an addiction, correct me if I'm wrong).

I thought that was ironic since gun ownership is not the problem. Guns do not cause people to murder one another. In general people do not kill one another for absolutely no reason, sometimes it happens but it is not the norm.

I contend that most of the crime inherent in our society these days is related to the useless failure that is the war on drugs.

If this modern day prohibition were ended crime would drop just like it did the last time prohibition was ended. Murders and gun related crimes would drop, and children would be able to go out in thier neighborhoods.

Also nice of you to ignore my comments regarding your thoughts on the police.

[Acebass]

67. No I'm just not going to let you change the subject...n/t

[Jack_DeLeon]

181. To you anything other than...

"guns are bad mkay" is changing the subject.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

102. As a former mod in the Gun Dungeon

I agree that the problem is America's gun fetish.

There's no other way to describe it. When people oppose any limitations on gun ownership at all (such as against selling them to paranoid schizophrenics or convicted felons) and pitch a cyberfit at the very thought, there's something beyond logic going on.

We don't let people drive without taking training and passing a test, and we require them to register and insure their cars, and cars aren't even intended for killing living things.

Imagine if "car nuts" went ballistic at the thought of registering and insuring their cars simply because car thieves don't do it.

I distinguish between responsible gun owners and those who have a screw loose somewhere and act as if limitations on gun ownership and use are tantamount to castration.

[Acebass]

105. Now we're getting somewhere...thanks!

[SlipperySlope]

118. You are wrong - plain and simple.

In this country, anybody can purchase a car. They don't need a drivers license, they don't need to register it, they don't need to insure it, they can be convicted felons, they can be a paranoid schizophreneic.

Cars are basically 100% unregulated until you cross a certain threshold. That threshold is the moment you want to use your car on the public roads. As long as you are driving your car on your back forty acres, using a trailer to haul it from race to race, and not operating it on taxpayer-funded roads you are still have your liberty.

Guns aren't treated anywhere nearly as sanely. Even if I build my own gun from scratch in a machine shop, and never take it outside my house, I can still be breaking someones so-called "law" about what sort of gun I can own.

[Acebass]

157. Your absolutly right!...

If you start making guns, we want to know about it!...Why is that so hard to understand...

Just because people are killed with and in cars doesn't mean they were manufactured to do that...

Guns are made to kill things...

[Paladin]

174. Believe Me, That Argument Hasn't Improved With Age

Just what percentage of car usage in this country is performed exclusively on non-public roads? Maybe 1%? Even those people who stay on the "back 40 acres" have to get on the county road occasionally to get some gas or a six-pack. And as for cars that are hauled from race to race---please, stop embarrassing yourself....

[SlipperySlope]

213. No need to improve perfection...

N/T

[Paladin]

227. Always Glad To Dispense Good Advice To The Opposition....

...when I know there's not a snowball's chance in hell of it being followed.

Please feel free to use the "unlicensed car on the back 40" argument for the next few decades. You're absolutely right, it's perfection itself---from my standpoint, anyway....

[Acebass]

240. Mankind has found many ingenious ways to kill people...

but guns don't take hardle any thought at all to kill...Hmmmm you don't suppose do you?!...:rofl:

[Canadiana]

153. Hear hear.

Owning a gun is not my god given right. Thank god.

[RB TexLa]

34. If deer had the rational thought it requires to be able to acquire and

shoot guns they would probably regulate their population and there would not be a deer hunting season.

[Acebass]

36. So we're just regulating the human population...

in order that we don't a human hunting season?...

Hmmm interesting concept...

[RB TexLa]

37. I wasn't getting into the actual debate

just making the statement about deer and the ability to shoot people.

[Acebass]

43. It was just something to think about...you shouldnt take it literally..

[Maine-ah]

91. I would say that is sounds like

the police dept. isn't doing their job.

*note, this is in no way meant to sound "snarkey". I just believe in being able to own a gun, we own two shot guns. Just better rules need to be applied to those that purchase them(ie background checks, ect). And the police need to get the illegal guns off the streets.

[Acebass]

114. Shotguns are not the problem...

Sporting weapons aren't a problem. The problem is that gun nuts supported by the IRA want to parse the issue and otherwise muddy the water. According to the NRA and most of the gun enthusiasts I've seen anythings up for grabs...
True story; here in Kentucky, not far from where I live, some good ol boys decided to get a couple M60s I think thats what they were (I'm sure I'll be corrected if I am wrong) and mount them to a boat, a john boat, then the idiots decided to see what they would do. Ever see a Kayak going down stream in a rapids? Lucky they were in shallow water...LOL

[Jack_DeLeon]

182. The 2nd amendment is not about hunting...

most gun owners do not hunt.

I do not hunt.

[Acebass]

203. 2nd amendment, 2nd amendment, 2nd amendment...

Article
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

because the need for a well regulated militia has seen it's better day, maybe we should rethink your beloved 2nd amendment...

[Nicole]

193. Did you even read the article?

It states "She is angry that she was shot last week while standing outside at 39th Street and River Park Drive, near her home".

Now you say she was sitting on her front porch. Which is it?

In your rush to bash gun owners perhaps you posted this before actually reading all of it?

[Paladin]

77. Which Pretty Much Sums Up The Pro-Gun Side Of Things

You gun activists are perfectly fine with all the violence involving guns in this country. You view it as an acceptable trade-off for your having easy access to as many guns as you want. The only actions you approve of are inevitably retroactive in nature: AFTER an individual becomes a sociopath, and AFTER said sociopath acquires a large collection of firearms and ammunition with minimal effort, and AFTER said sociopath uses his arsenal to turn a public school or office building or neighborhood into an abatoir, and AFTER said sociopath inevitably blows his own brains out when law enforcement closes in---THEN we ought to throw the book at him, by God.

You people may revel in a jungle-like setting where the Bad Guys set all the rules and societal advancement is deemed to be impossible. Most of us normal people don't think that way, which is why the majority of this country consistently favors gun control.....

[Acebass]

88. Wish I'd said that!...n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

101. Wow! Amazingly you think I'm composed of straw...

Read my posts and tell me that I believe anything like what you just tried to shove down my throat.

[SlipperySlope]

119. What majority? What gun control?

What poll are you talking about?

Is it the one where they ask "do you support reasonable gun control"?

If so, then I would answer "yes" to that poll. I support reasonable gun control. Unfortunately, we currently have unreasonable gun control. Reasonable gun control would involve throwing away almost every gun law that has been passed since 1929.

Just because people answer yes to your question, doesn't mean you understand their answer.

[Canadiana]

189. YES

[ScreamingMeemie]

235. "You people"...Always a great way to debate.

I am a normal person who owns several hunting rifles. I am a normal person who supports some forms of gun control. I am a normal person who realizes we can't all have it exactly the way we want it.

Thank You.

[Paladin]

255. I Guess If I'd Said "You Assholes," You'd REALLY Be Steamed....

n/t

[ScreamingMeemie]

256. Nope. It would be typical of a person who would also use "you people".

It automatically raises doubt as to the ability to debate on the part of the poster. Sorry. You catch more flies with sugar.

[EstimatedProphet]

261. Wow! There's 2 of us!

who could possibly have figured? Wait! Maybe there's even more...

[Acebass]

273. don't forget me, I'm the asshole that started this thing...LOL

[Donald Ian Rankin]

221. You don't live in a free society; nor should you.

You are not free to murder, or to steal, or to drive on the left.

You *are* currently free to own guns, but the vast number of innocent people shot every year who would have been saved by decent gun control means that that's a freedom that's undoubtedly not worth its cost, and should be removed.

One of the principles of a democracy is that everything should be permitted unless there's a good reason to forbid it, *not* that everything should be permitted. There are very good reasons indeed to strongly restrict gun ownership.

"Rights are more important than any individual" is a sufficiently vacuous claim to be hard to rebut, but I will point out that it's not one individual but roughly 30,000 a year, according to http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html (although I make no claims about the reliability of my source).

[rman]

222. We can have the right to own a gun and gun control at the same time.

In the same way that we have the right to own a car, and regulation of ownership of cars (drivers license, exams) at the same time.

Rights and restrictions are not mutually exclusive.

[Irreverend IX]

30. Freedom of the press kills!

After the media reported that Rodney King's attackers were acquited, Los Angeles was engulfed by riots that killed 55 people. The publication of the Mohammed cartoons has caused many more deaths and injuries. Can you really say to the victims of these tragedies that an independent press is worth the bloodshed and suffering that it causes? A free press may have made sense in 1776, but in the 21st century it's only reasonable that all media communications should be authorized and regulated by the government.

[subutane]

32. Who we kill

Who We Kill

March/April 1996: For every attacker shot and killed in self-defense, 130 Americans are killed by guns for other reasons.

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1996/03/kill.html

[Acebass]

33. Precisly...whos rights are being infringed on?...

[Jack_DeLeon]

39. I'm not infringing on anyones rights...

but it seems like you and those that think like you would like to infringe on my rights.

Murderers infringe upon the rights of those that they murder.

Who's rights have I infringed upon?

[Acebass]

44. You haven't been listening have you?...

Did you fire the shot that went through the lttle girls back, or the 5 year olds hip...if not then you have nothing to worry about.
It's only when your right to have a gun interfers with a 12 year old girls right to live that we have a problem.

[Jack_DeLeon]

47. So according to you are my rights infringing on hers?

[subutane]

55. nothing protects a family more...

...than crossfire

[Acebass]

94. Did I say that?...No I don't think so...n/t

[subutane]

45. Where do you shoot your gun?

Is it in earshot of the public? Do you think they want to listen to you blast your gun all day? Are you poisoning the earth when you do shoot? If you don't shoot why do you have the gun? Do you realize the fact that you have a gun makes it more likely someone in your house will die from a gunshot?

[Jack_DeLeon]

51. I shoot wherever it is legal...

Mostly I've only shot at two logal ranges. One indoors, and one outdoors at the edge of town.

I dont think if people want to hear my gunshots all day long. I figure if they dont then we can have a civillized discussion about it. Since no one has commented on it I assume either no one heres or those that do dont care.

Are you poisoning the earth when you do shoot?

Most likely. Are you poisoning the earth by using electricy to power your home, to use your computer, to use the internet to post your message, the answer to that is probably the same. Everybody has an effect on the earth. I suppose if we want to stop humans from poisoning the earth we could all just commit seppeku, you first if you feel that strongly about it.

If you don't shoot why do you have the gun?

I do shoot it, I try my best to be a proficient marksman. I enjoy shooting. I also have my firearms so that I could defend myself if I ever have to, be it from the criminals, an authoritarian government, foreign invasion, white people, or aliens from outer space.

Do you realize the fact that you have a gun makes it more likely someone in your house will die from a gunshot?

I've heard people say that, it wouldnt surprise me though, its only logical. Cause if I removed all the sharp objects from my house I'm sure it would be less likely that someone would cut themselves, althought that does not mean that it would reduce the probability to zero.

[subutane]

53. my condolences to you and yours

ok, let's say it's 3 am...there is a fire a few doors down but for some reason you didn't hear the sirens...you see flashing lights when you awake and hear someone coming towards your door....your groggy but you know where your gun is....you grab the gun and are startled when the door opens....you shoot....and kill a firefighter that was trying to rescue your dumb ass....

think about it

[Jack_DeLeon]

56. my condolences to you and yours aswell...

ok, let's say it's 3 am...you are driving, you switch lanes but for some reason you dont look...you sideswipe a couple riding a motorcyle, one of them the guy dies and the girl is permanetly injured for the rest of her life.

think about it

See I can make up random bullshit too.

Not that any of this is of any relevence since it was just some bullshit story you made up, but what the hell I am bored. I am usually quite awake at 3am. A few doors down is 3 houses away and there was a small fire there about a month ago during the night, no firefighters died. Flashing lights usually do not scare me. Why the fuck is a firefighters coming into my home to "rescue my dumb ass." When there is a fire that needs to be fought 3 houses away?

[Acebass]

69. Think?...thats an alien word ...you'll love these links...

This is a real thinking mans sport...

http://www.machinegunshoot.com/images/Intro1_B_56.wmv

http://www.machinegunshoot.com/images/Intro1_A_56.wmv

http://www.machinegunshoot.com/images/Intro_pt2_56.wmv

It has nothing to with protection, it boys playing with their toys...

[Acebass]

74. here's the disconnect...

you equate guns as nothing more than a utensil...you read the paper but nothing really happens to YOU personally...it's all because you have your guns that nothing ever happens to you...

Come into the real world. If we had a better ecomomy for all and more money for, trained protection, we wouldn't need to feel we needed guns for our protection...

But then could that be the reason for all this? The Republicans, with the help of the NRA, starved the government so that the conditions would be right for more guns and less government. No money for police protection , no money for judges, no jobs for the lower class. Hmmm there is a method to their maddness after all...

[REP]

57. Now I Will Live In Fear Of Being Shot By My Cats

The humans are trained marksmen, so it's the cats we have to worry about, obviously... Oh god how can I sleep now???

Can cats work a bolt action?

[Jack_DeLeon]

58. If cats had opposable thumbs...

they would rule the world.

[REP]

59. And Go On Shooting Sprees ... Or Not

They do sleep a lot.

[subutane]

110. only with their back legs

so their aim is wildly inaccurate

[Solo_in_MD]

50. Those stats are suspect

[subutane]

54. and i take it

you care not to explain yourself

[Acebass]

70. All stats are suspect...do your own research...n/t

[Jigarotta]

52. we can remove guns from society or...

(ahaha, not likely, after all big Guns run the country, the govmint type. the kind that kills in huge numbers - it's not murder then, the more you kill in a name of something made up the lesser the crime and the more faceless the dead)

...have a social system where there is no need to use them in desperation. violence is a last desparate act. Why do we have such desparate people to act like this?

why are we so ill?

I was very anti-gun in years past, but now I see owning one doesn't make you instant crazy. It's insurance against the government, as what it was meant to be.

[Acebass]

66. Funny I was pro gun at one time...

Then a pistol I had was stolen and used in two crimes...I'm pretty careful but it happened anyway...then it hit me, if I didn't think it was a good to have a gun around, a man would still be alive...

No a persons not crazy for having a gun, your just crazy if you think it will solve any problems...

I wish Peace begat Peace, as well as Violence begat Violence...

[ThomWV]

68. Good For You. I'll Keep My Guns Thank You

Because I have a Constitutional Right to for one thing but because I simply want to for the other.

[Acebass]

71. Just keep it to yourself and we have no problem...

when youyr gun gets into the hands of a criminal don't say you weren't told...

[anarch]

73. if nothing else, I'd like to think that peace does in fact beget peace

so...peace to us all. Rooting out violent tendencies in humans is probably a lost cause, but a noble one.

Sorry to hear about your past history with guns. What happened really isn't your fault, though. You should never blame yourself. All any of us can do in life is to try to do the best we can.

[Acebass]

76. I don't blame myself...

It's not natural in this day and age to feel we need such things for our protection. I have to wonder about people who get their jolly's by shooting up a hill side, even though I was once there. I look back and think why, that was stupid to say fill a jug with water, then shoot it with a 9 mil. to see what happens.
When you think about what could happen if that gun your holding weren't in your hands but someone else's, someone not as responsible as you are, and it can happen to anyone, don't think it can't.
That is how criminals get their guns. You don't think they go in and register and go through the waiting period like law abiding folks do you?
Rooting out violence should be an on going thing. No, as long as there are two human beings on this planet there will always be violence. We can however concentrate on deescalating, and where possible, disarming, the combatants

[Paladin]

82. I Used To Be Pro-Gun, Too

I still have a number of them, gathering dust in a closet. The reason I walked away from the shooting sports was because I got tired of dealing with all the jerks I encountered, and I didn't want to be considered to be a jerk, myself. Think about it: a couple of generations ago, shooting and hunting were respectable pursuits in this society; individuals like Ernest Hemingway and Clark Gable were some of the prominent figures involved. I guess you know which public "celebrity" represents shooting sports today: Ted Nugent. He's a board member of the NRA, that splendid outfit that gives its highest annual award to responsible sportsmen like Dick Cheney, and honorable politicians like Tom Delay.....

[Acebass]

87. Thats where I'm coming from!... thanks you...n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

107. Here's the problem with that stance

When you come from the assumption that someone who owns a gun is a jerk just because you've encountered a lot of jerks who own guns, then you're not exactly being fair to the gun owners that aren't jerks.

If what you're saying here is true, then it should be encouragement that there are people on this board who have guns, because we're not like the people you're talking about. It's no more right to assume that people here who are gun owners are jerks than it is for jerk gun owners to assume someone who supports gun control is a flake that dances in the woods and hugs flowers.

I know the kind of people you're talking about, and yes, they are jerks. But that's them, not everyone. I for one am nothing like Cheney, Delay, or Nugent, and I don't want to be. I'd rather be a stand-up citizen and a decent person.

[Paladin]

125. I Don't Fly The Confederate Flag, Either.....

....even though I have distant relatives who fought for that cause, and I could (with considerable effort and a lot of misgivings) make some sort of argument about honoring my "heritage," like others do on those all-to-frequent re-fights of the Civil War threads we have to put up with here at DU. And maybe I'd think about having a Confederate flag in my house---except I know that every sick, right-wing racist group in the country has adopted it as their sacred symbol, thus ruining it for us "stand-up," "decent" citizens.

Same principle with the shooting sports. The right-wing extremists have taken them into the gutter, somewhere just above cock fighting, as far as I'm concerned. I don't care to go there.....

[EstimatedProphet]

130. Guns are tools. They cross all borders.

The Confederate flag is a symbol, and the meaning of that symbol has consistently had racism behind it. If you think that it stood for equality during the Civil War, you are mistaken. A large (not exclusive, but certainly critical) portion of the southern rebellion movement was about the rights of people to own slaves. It can't be taken out of the movement (as much as people have tried lately) anymore than anti-semitism can be taken out of Nazism.

Frankly what you are saying to me is that you would rather keep believing that I belong in the gutter, as you put it, then see the gun rights movement take back reason.

[Paladin]

173. A Few Points

1. I know that the gun rights movement is fond of saying that guns are only tools, but that notion is ultimately bullshit. If guns are just tools, how come we don't have a Screwdriver Owners' Forum here at DU, with lots of photos posted of the latest and "scariest" Phillips-head models? How come there isn't an American Toaster Association, cramming cash into the pockets of right-wing politicians? Where are the big hammer shows at your local convention center, with guys dressed up in Nazi uniforms to show off the kind of hammers the Wehrmacht used in WWII?

2. Don't ever again suggest that I might equate the Confederate flag with some sort of equality. I said no such thing, I don't believe anything of the sort, and if you say something like that again, I'll alert the moderators.

3. I'd love to see the gun rights movement "take back reason," as you put it. I'd also love to have every kid in this country go to sleep at night with a full belly. I wonder if either of those admirable goals will be attained during our lifetimes?

[EstimatedProphet]

238. Not what I was saying

....even though I have distant relatives who fought for that cause, and I could (with considerable effort and a lot of misgivings) make some sort of argument about honoring my "heritage," like others do on those all-to-frequent re-fights of the Civil War threads we have to put up with here at DU. And maybe I'd think about having a Confederate flag in my house---except I know that every sick, right-wing racist group in the country has adopted it as their sacred symbol, thus ruining it for us "stand-up," "decent" citizens.

I'm trying to make the point that the Confederate flag is a symbol, and a gun is a tool. When I said that it isn't a symbol of equality, I was saying that people in general can't use it for one, not you personally. You clearly don't see it as a symbol of equality, otherwise you wouldn't use it as an example. This is the reason that you can't hang it in your home, as you said.

You want to tell me that there's people that make guns out to be a symbol-yes, there are. That doesn't make them so. In other words, it's gun fetishism, as Lydia said earlier, that we need to fight. It is possible to own guns without fetishizing them. As another example, when I was younger I used to hate hunting. As I grew up I realized that I didn't hate hunting i itself, I hated the jackass kids that I went to school that were hunters, and I equated hunting with them. I don't like gun shows for the reasons you listed above, because it makes me feel uncomfortable to be around the people that hang out there. They are gun fetishists, they're puffed-up fake macho jackasses that constantly look for ways they can show off what big men they are. That, however, is them. That's not gun ownership.

And maybe you don't think that the gun movement is capable of taking back reason, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be tried. Maybe we as progressives aren't capable of taking back the government either. I'm not giving up on either fight.

[subutane]

111. badabing

couldn't have asked that statement to be worded any better.

[marions ghost]

75. insurance against the government

:crazy: is to me the LEAST sane reason for owning a gun.

Insurance against some member of your community threatening you with a gun is what it's all about. The more guns around, the more the need for one. Guns are tools to kill and injure, and that's generally what they end up doing.

But if you really think you're going up against the government, well that sounds delusional to me. A romantic fantasy.

[Acebass]

78. LOL..thank you!...

The mental picture that gives me...

I know what your saying, I can see Joe Citizen running out of his house with his 9 mil only to be wasted in a second in a hail of gun fire...

It's our government! Take interest in it and you won't have to fear it!

[marions ghost]

83. yeah...duh

...buying guns is NOT going to help us recover the trillions they stole from us. Or give us a sane government. Personnally I'm not gonna be sittin on the porch in my rockin chair with my AK 47 that I got at Wal Mart anytime soon. Too much Wiley E. Coyote identification going on in that scenario IMO.
I don't really understand how people can put that out. It sounds so pathetic. Citizen "militias" are an anachronistic joke.

[Acebass]

86. They think they are there to protect us...I got news for em...

I don't want your protection...I grew up and quit playing soldier right after I realized what that really meant...

I would rather work toward an Amereica that trusts it's government to do the right thing, because We the People make sure they do...by electing responsible representatives!...

[dysfunctional press]

79. to me, it's insurance against a LACK of government...

when(not if) things fall apart, people are going to need to be able to protect themselves and their families.

i'm keeping my guns.

[Acebass]

81. It's not to late...

Arming the citizenry is the last gasp of a desperate nation...
I can't bring myself to believe we're there yet...
But I do believe that the course we are taking will hasten the end...

[dysfunctional press]

84. "Arming the citizenry is the last gasp of a desperate nation..."

since when, and says who...?

besides- the nation isn't arming the citizenry...the citizens are arming themselves.

and i'd suggest that all who can- do the same.

[Acebass]

85. Like I said!...n/t

[Maddy McCall]

139. False premise. If that were the case....

our nation would have been in its "last gasp" upon its founding.

[Acebass]

164. That was then...this is now...we've come a long way...maybe?!...n/t

[dysfunctional press]

171. exactly- back then all that was available were muzzle-loaded guns...

now we have bullets, rifling, machine guns, semi-auto's, hollow points, laser-sighting, .50caliber sniper rifles, munitions of all sizes and calibers...

it's exciting to think what the future holds.

[marions ghost]

89. how do you figure

we will have a lack of government? (Kinda like over in Iraq? Is that really what you are predicting?)
How well did that work in New Orleans under martial law?

I honestly don't understand the scenario you are describing.

[Acebass]

93. No we can start by taking our congress back in Nov....

and we precede from there... It wasn't always like this... Only when we started listening to the naysayers and moaners...those that say Gov. can't work or is broken...
It's only that way because we let it. It is after all our Government and we, with due diligence, can see to it that it serves the will of the people instead of big business...\
No your scenario is much to apocalyptic, we're no where near there yet...

[marions ghost]

106. I was replying to someone else --see post #79

I do not predict an apocalyptic scenario. I believe as you do, that those scenarios are paranoid and beside the point. I was replying to post #79, where the poster says they fear a LACK of government. (Personally I fear too much govt and too much use of military force--obviously a Republican-controlled govt will infringe on the rights of citizens).

[Acebass]

160. Sorry...it's hard to tell sometime...n/t

[dysfunctional press]

127. in new orleans, post-katrina...

how many police officers failed to show up because they were more concerned about their own families than their jobs, their duty, or their city?

when there's a breakdown of government/services due to natural disasters related to global warming/nuclear war/whatever- the people WITH guns are going to be much better off than those without.

being a boy scout taught me to be prepared.

[TheBaldyMan]

123. I've found that organising, demonstrating and other forms of

direct action are of greater utility. Your gunplay won't happen until the ATF goons come knocking on your fallout shelter door.

Maybe if there were a greater sense of social cohesion and less of a sense of alienation there wouldn't be as much criminal behaviour.

Maybe if your whole nation started to act as though all Americans had worth and didn't segregate then demonise whole sections of the community incidents such as those mentioned by the OP would be much, much rarer.

Instead the US clings to it's handgun fetish, condemns all forms of collective provision as communism and any attempt at equitable life and opportunity as deeply un-american.

[dysfunctional press]

132. you go ahead and live with your maybes...

i like to be prepared for when there's a breakdown in society/civilization.

ask the korean shopkeepers around florence & normandy how well "organising, demonstrating and other forms of direct action" would have helped them save their stores(without guns) on the day the rodney king verdict came in.

some people just don't get it...sheesh...:eyes:

[Acebass]

163. and guns would help the situation how?...n/t

[dysfunctional press]

169. like i said...

ask the korean shopkeepers around florence & normandy if you really can't figure that one out for yourself...:eye:

as for me- when the bad times come, i'd rather be one of the ones with a gun(s) than one of those without. but you're free to make whatever choice you feel gives you and yours the most comfort and security.

[TheBaldyMan]

175. LOL - You mean when Iran invades ?

I do get it, you are unlucky enough to live in a society that thinks that gun-ownership is one of the paramount freedoms, other equally important liberties are trampled underfoot as you stockpile weaponry and ammunition for the final battle.

The main flaw in your stance is this, you propose guns as a solution for a crisis that comes about because you have not addressed the causes of conflict.

Nightsticks didn't beat Rodney King up, racist police beat Rodney king up. The subsequent aquittal put a spark to the tinder.

A societal gun fetish doesn't stop riots but treating every member of society as human beings does.

I hope I have set the record straight regarding my maybes. You prefer plain speaking so I hope this post makes my position clear.

[dysfunctional press]

176. i live in reality.

anybody who thinks that guns are going to magically disappear one day, or spends their time daydreaming about wonderful world it would be if guns did not exist...doesn't.

[TheBaldyMan]

186. NEWSFLASH - lots of counties outside the US don't have the love affair

with handguns that the US does. Your country is unique in the prominence you give to gun ownership. It is institutional madness.

Other countries are peaceful with lower crime rates some have very strict gun ownership laws others have almost no regulation. It is possible to live without firearms. Even if I could walk down my High Street to my local gunsmith and order a fully-automatic assault rifle or a pistol with a concealable holster I wouldn't.

Whole societies have existed quite happily and prospered without ubiquitous firearm ownership. A lot of America's woes would be solved if people stopped owning them, you could still have the right to own them, you just wouldn't be exercising that right. Just like a free press or equality under law. In fact it would be far more profitable to defend those other two liberties than your gun-ownership one which is perpetual in cost and occasional in use.

[dysfunctional press]

197. i'd be thrilled if there were no guns in the U.S.

but it just isn't going to happen. ever.
and as long as there are people out there with guns, the intelligent move is to make sure that you have your own too.
and in the u.s., there's ALWAYS going to be people with guns- until the technology is developed to render them completely useless and ineffective...but i don't see that happening in my lifetime.

[dysfunctional press]

177. and no- i'm not worried about any country invading us...

not in my lifetime anyway.

the only thing that might concern me is a natural calamity, or nuclear war(i don't consider missles to be an "invasion"- that would require troops) that causes a general breakdown in society...that's something that i see as entirely possible in my lifetime, and i prefer to be prepared for any potential aftermath.

[Acebass]

161. Guns are the wedge that prevent rational discourse!...n/t

[dysfunctional press]

170. well- they're here to STAY, so you might as well learn to live with it.

face it- guns aren't going to go away in this country...EVER.

[EstimatedProphet]

265. But see, don't fall for it

You're right, they are being used as a wedge issue. But if you let that distract you, they'll get away with it. The real issue is that we are a nation that lives in fear and paranoia, we have abject inequality here and crimes are rampant because of it. If we let the NRA try to make this about people that want to take everyone's guns away, they'll win and we won't get anywhere. When they try to go down that road, we have to ask them why it is they think reasonable gun controls are so terrifying, why they think that everyone has a god-given right to as many and as lethal of weapons as they can get their hands on, and why it is they keep trying to bring this up to change the argument when it comes around instead of productive analysis of how to go about making our society better for everyone.

[Ksec]

98. Its violence thats the problem Guns are just the scapegoat

If it werent guns, it would be knives, or baseball bats, or rocks.

Murder happened before guns appeared.

[Solo_in_MD]

199. Brits are finding that out...

larger knives and swords are currently being targets

[Minnesota Libra]

109. Outlaw guns and ONLY outlaws will have guns. Yes, I know I will.........

....get flamed for this. I am VERY sorry :cry: this 12 yr old child was shot and yes I wish humans had much more sense than to do crap like this.:cry:

IMHO, the person that shot her should be hunted down, tried, convicted, and sent to prison for assault with a deadly weapon, attempted first-degree murder. Then the key should be thrown away and the person should be put to hard labor. Yes, I'm one of those who feel we need to be VERY tough on crime.

Yes, even if this was one of my own kids I would STILL be saying guns SHOULD NOT be outlawed.

[subutane]

116. funny how...

...someone who makes a blanket conjecture always expects to get flamed.

"In mathematics, a conjecture is a mathematical statement which has been proposed as a true statement, but which no one has yet been able to prove or disprove."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjecture

[Ksec]

121. It wasnt meant that way

Im being serious. The problem is violence. Why are people becoming so violent? Ill also agree we need common sense gun control. A ban on assault rifles and stricter control on handguns.

[Minnesota Libra]

168. Laws are on the books now to properly control both assault rifles and.....

.....hand guns while not banning guns outright for responsible gun owners. I just don't understand why some people want to outlaw guns entirely just because some people want to be jerks. That would like outlawing cars because some car owners use cars irresponsibly and hurt or kill someone doing it.

[Minnesota Libra]

122. Let's get back original issue, anything constructive to add?? nt

[subutane]

128. how about my own experience

My father was a sniper in the Army. He taught me how to shoot and to shoot very well. Unfortunatley he didn't really go into what I was supposed to shoot or not shoot. One day I turned my site on a tiny little bird that was very far away and said to myself...i'll never hit it. I did hit it. I went inside and put the gun down...and never picked one up again.

[Maddy McCall]

135. Which begs the point....

that people who haven't had thorough training in handling guns should not fire guns.

Very irresponsible of your father.

[subutane]

142. yeah and there are so few

irresponsible fathers in America...right?

[Acebass]

156. Good point!...

[Minnesota Libra]

167. subutane, I understand your feelings and your point but why even..........

....consider making everyone else pay for the fact that your father didn't teach you all the points of proper gun ownership and usage?

Why shouldn't those who are willing and able to own and use guns responsibly be able to have them knowing there will be extremely severe consequences if those guns are used for any purpose except hunting and self-defense?? I, for one, do not mind gun registration, but I do mind someone telling me I can't be trusted with a gun because someone else misused a gun. That is like telling me I can't be trusted with a car because someone else killed someone using a car as a instrument of death. Some at DU make disagree with comparing guns and cars but in reality both items can be used to sport or for death. It's not the item at fault it's the user that is at fault.

[subutane]

191. think you misunderstood or i didn't explain

Basically...I know there are times when a gun is needed in order to protect one's own life.

The Army trained my father how to shoot but didn't give him the skills to teach others about important things that go along with shooting. He was released back into society as were thousands and thousands of other guys with the same set of killing skills. And in my mind a latent desire to kill.

The desire to kill wasn't there for me. Any kid who picks up a gun and kills something for no apparent reason and then continues to kill...I worry about. Many hunters admit to loving the thrill of taking something else's life. If it's a thrill...I wonder why. And I wonder why they feel the need to do it.

Killing something for food and sustainance because there are no other options is one thing...killing something for the hell of it is an immediate and irreversible step into the dark side of man.

[Minnesota Libra]

224. subutane, ok, now that you explained that I agree with you...........

....I just don't understand the need or even the desire to outlaw guns completely. There are enough laws on the books right now to make a lifetime example of each and every person who misuses guns and that's where the hard hand of the law should be too.

[EstimatedProphet]

263. Really?

Many hunters admit to loving the thrill of taking something else's life.

None that I've ever met. Well, almost none-the one I can think of, as an adult, was an obvious loudmouth, and made no friends that way. This isn't how hunters talk.

[Acebass]

144. So whats to be done ...

and to hell with the system that put the gun in the shooters hand...no one's to blame but the shooter?...is that it?...

[Maddy McCall]

126. Sorry, Stacia, about what happened to you....

but I'm not giving up the protection offered by my .45 for anyone.

Signed,
Single Parent with a Crazed Ex-Husband.

[Greyhound]

129. Some observations...

She was shot and is angry. She speaks out against violence, but then calls for the wrath of her vengeful god to "...get you for it. Your time will come, best believe it". Quite the little pacifist...

There is nothing about who shot her, or what the shooting was about. The following from the article "On April 5, 3-year-old Isaiah Gregory was hit in the buttocks while on a playground just a few feet from his front door in the Sheppard Square housing complex." indicates that she is living in one of the cesspools common to every city in the country, where men, women, and children, are shot on a daily basis. It was likely a conflict over, or inspired by, drugs. Yet she is angry at the guns, not the cause of the conflict.

The residents of these neighborhoods know exactly who the bangers and the dealers are, yet they fear the police more than they fear the perpetrators, and therefore, won't cooperate with those we have assigned to maintain order. The issue is not guns, the issues are economic inequity and social neglect, address these and the gun issue becomes irrelevant.

[Acebass]

149. you deal with an issue at a time...right now the issue is guns...

encouraging more guns and less gun regulation only adds to the problem...

Cleaning up the cess pool by creating good jobs with a living wage would go along way to solving the problem but as long as the NRA's "Arm America" movment is alive we'll never get to the core of the problem...
They don't want us to, they want us to buy more guns...

[Greyhound]

162. Sorry, but you have it backward.

There are about 250 - 300 million firearms in this country, trying to cure the problem your way will only further the power of the police state which, in turn, will exacerbate the previously mentioned problems of economic inequity and social neglect.
Do you remember how dramatically gun violence declined in the 90's and that was a fake economic expansion that really only reached about half of the population. You are addressing a symptom, not the disease.

[Acebass]

165. Excuse me...I'm talking America...

You are not...I repeat, NOT!...going to do anything with that argument...it is irrelevent that you, with any amount of fire power, would have any effect on an out of control governement...
Your best bet is to get involved IN your government and take an active role in making it work....

[benEzra]

172. I am...as you are, I'm sure...

Your best bet is to get involved IN your government and take an active role in making it work....

I am, as you are, I'm sure...

...but like 65 to 80 MILLION others of voting age, I also own guns, and will continue to do so.

You can either work to send the police and/or military to take them (and repeal the Fourth Amendment while you're at it)--which will never happen--or you can accept the fact that we own them and will continue to do so, and find common ground with me on addressing the real issues that you SAY are more important.

[Acebass]

200. Hi Ben...long time no see...

I see your still hold up with your guns...

[benEzra]

226. Hi, Ace...

:toast:

I still get back to Common Ground Common Sense fairly regularly, but mostly hang out here.

Yup, the guns are still in the gun safe, and Bill Bennett and Dianne Feinstein can sputter about it all they want...

Good to see you on DU!

[Acebass]

253. Thanks...good to be here...

I didn't pay my dues so I don't go back...

looks like I started something...LOL well you know me...:)

later...

[Greyhound]

185. Is there some kind of playbook out there that tells you to avoid answering

a position by answering something else? It seems to be a consistent tactic any time this issue comes up. I say the social issues are the cause of the violence and you respond that I can't overthrow the government with my Mini-14. :eyes::wtf:

[Acebass]

202. You take away the guns and the social issues will improve...

A mini 14 you say...do you have any other interests?...

[Greyhound]

218. OK, I'll play, just how do you propose to take away 250 million guns?

and that's just in here.

[Acebass]

269. One at a time...

Now this is a start, but at least it's in the right direction. Some people aren't giving up...

You want to read more your going to have to buy the story, I've already read it.




1. A community combats violence; Guns take new form, meaning
December 4, 2004 •• 511 words •• ID: lou2004120606053448
Artists to reshape buyback weapons Peter Smith. [email protected]. The Courier-Journal. More than seven dozen guns collected in a recent buyback program in Louisville soon will take on a new role - as art.. The Justice Resource Center, which bought 87 guns for $25 each during the past five weeks, is turning them over to two local artists who plan to make sculptures illustrating the trauma of gun violence.. Sculptor Ed Hamilton said his goal will be "to create


2. Firearms buyback may repeat
January 31, 2000 •• 692 words •• ID: lou2000020109522704
Officials paid $50 each for about 140 guns JIM HANNAH, The Courier-Journal. The success of last week's gun buyback program at public housing complexes has organizers hoping for a repeat.. ``I only have about $28,000 to spend on this program, but I wish I had $1 million,'' said John Groves, who is in charge of safety and investigation for the Housing Authority of Louisville. ``None of the guns turned in to us will take a life on the


3. Three-day buyback nets 229 firearms
December 13, 2000 •• 757 words •• ID: lou2001042308544173
Need for money, awareness of risk credited for sales. DARLA CARTER, The Courier-Journal. Ted Sanders had an altruistic motive yesterday when he turned over a target pistol to authorities during the final day of a gun buyback program at three Louisville public housing developments.. The way he sees it, gun buybacks - in which guns are exchanged for cash - are good for the community.. ``It keeps down robberies - that's for sure,'' Sanders said after


4. HUD may buy confiscated guns
May 27, 2000 •• 1187 words •• ID: lou2000053006440013
Move would sidestep auction requirement. TOM LOFTUS, The Courier-Journal. FRANKFORT, Ky.. Police departments seeking to destroy confiscated firearms may be able to turn to a federal gun buyback program to get around a state law requiring such guns to be sold at auction.. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development office in Kentucky has asked the state attorney general's office to research whether state law allows HUD to buy the guns from police departments..


http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?s_site=louisville&f_site=louisville&f_sitename=Courier-Journal%2C+The+%28Louisville%2C+KY%29&p_theme=gannett&p_product=LCJB&p_action=search&p_field_base-0=&p_text_base-0=gun+buyback+program&Search=Search&p_perpage=10&p_maxdocs=200&p_queryname=700&s_search_type=keyword&p_sort=_rank_%3AD&p_field_date-0=YMD_date&p_params_date-0=date%3AB%2CE&p_text_date-0=

[Jack_DeLeon]

184. Dont you just love how this guy...

goes on about "the issue is guns."

He would rather take away a means of protection from millions of Americans, and the poorest ones are the ones that need it most, than to talk about or do something to help those same Americans.

[Acebass]

201. LOL...you really have no idea whats going on do you?...

[subutane]

133. Small Change got rained on with his own 38

an interesting preformance by Tom Waits that relates to the topic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=322Lqzh-ixs

[Acebass]

204. Dial up sucks...

I didn't have patients to wait for it... LOL

[IronLionZion]

187. criminals won't use guns if they are outlawed,

because criminals respect the law.

If we don't sell condoms to high school students, they'll just stop having sex.

Outlaw abortion, and people will stop having abortions. Nevermind the increase in business for the coat hanger industry.

Here's a thought: Just outlaw all crime and people will stop committing crimes! :think: ..oh wait.

:sarcasm:

It's a real shame what happened to poor Stacia. But violence is not going to stop as long as the forces of evil control the minds of some people.

It may be more effective to combat poverty and drugs or if your heart is really bleeding we can make sure that everyone is loved and treated with human dignity so they don't have the feeling of desperation that cause so many to resort to violent crime to vent their frustrations at the world.

When I was a kid some asshole tried to break into my grandparents house while we were sleeping inside. All my grandfather had to do was cock his shotgun once and that scared the guy away.

[Acebass]

206. "if your heart is really bleeding",I thought this was a Democratic forum.

Yes I have compassion for this young girl, who had every right to sit on her porch in downtown Louisville Ky, and expect not to get shot...

Your ridiculous sarcasm was just that. Criminals wouldn't use guns if they couldn't get them!...

We have a long way to go but at least I'm willing to give it a shot (no pun intended). It would seem some would rather give up and look out for just themselves...

Don't forget it's my country too, and I also have a say. Just because you have a gun doesn't mean your right...

[IronLionZion]

231. So if guns are illegal, then criminals can't get them?

Where do you think they get them now? Most gun crimes are committed with illegal unregistered guns bought on the black market.

Drugs are illegal, but people still get them somehow right?

Prostitution is illegal but every city has "escorts" right?

If you want something badly enough you can always find a way to get it. Because there is always someone willing to sell it to you. To think that criminals won't get something just because it's illegal, well now who's being foolish?

Of course young Stacia has the God-given right to life without being shot. But guns are only a small part of the problem. I firmly believe that violent crime of all types will go down if everyone is loved and has hope for their future, and people call me a bleeding heart idealist for that.

As a pro-freedom Democrat, I support all of our rights including the right to bear arms. It's not about hunting, it's about self-defense. Our founding fathers had to violently overthrow a corrupt government to create this country. It's important to keep that option open just in case.

It's like insurance. God forbid you have to use it, but it's smart to have it just in case you need it.

[Acebass]

252. I just love the way gun 'enthusiasts" just blow it off...

as if it were your tooth brush on a shelf, or an escort service...

What is your vision for America?...

[Mugu]

262. I realize that you didn’t ask me that question.

But my vision for America is a place where criminals are too scared to ply their trade. The one time that I’m in favor of the death penalty is during the commission of a crime. No repeat offenders, no expensive trial or incarceration, and there’s no question that the corpse is indeed that of the offender.

[Nicole]

194. I would tell her I'm sorry she was hurt

I would also tell Stacia that people who resort to violence will still be violent even if no guns were available. I lost a family member to violence, she was stabbed to death. If she had a gun available perhaps she would still be alive today.

[Acebass]

207. You do understand that Stacia was an innocent bystander...

Unlike your family member she was not in any way involved, just got in the way...

The violent people will be violent thing doesn't wash...take the gun out of the equation...little Stacia see's a fight down the street, goes in her house and goes to bed...

Guns have no conscience, they hit what they are aimed at...

[Nicole]

210. Yes, I realize that Stacia was an innocent bystander

What the hell makes you think my family member wasn't? That's an awful big jump to conclusions you're making.

My family member didn't know her attacker & wasn't involved other than she "just got in the way" like Stacia.


"Guns have no conscience, they hit what they are aimed at..." Same for knives & other objects used as deadly weapons.

AS for "The violent people will be violent thing doesn't wash", we'll just have to disagree on that. I've read too many news stories where people have committed violent acts without guns.


Funny you have time to make assumptions about my family member's role in her attack yet you didn't find time to address the lie you posted above about Stacia being an innocent bystander on her porch.

So I'll ask you once again:
Did you even read the article? Or, in your rush to bash gun owners, perhaps you posted this before actually reading all of it?

[Acebass]

212. Well just excuse the shit out of me!...

She vividly remembers what happened the night of April 11. It started with a trip to the corner store, where she bought noodles and a bag of Doritos. She walked toward her house when she stopped to talk with some relatives and friends.

Stacia said she noticed a man go down 39th Street and then down an alley. She didn't pay much attention until she heard the gunshots.

Now what the hell difference did that make?...

She was standing on the sidewalk, your right I didn't read it all the way down...

now all I have is your word about any sister so now lets see who the LIAR is...

Where's your proof, I think you made it all up...

I'll bash gun owners all I want...specially ones like you...

[Nicole]

214. Nice try

Nice of you to finally admit you didn't read all the way down. However that wasn't what I was referring to. I was referring to this, in your first post

She is angry that she was shot last week while standing outside at 39th Street and River Park Drive, near her home.

So you are now saying you don't even read all of what you post, not to mention the text in the actual link you post? How nice.

It doesn't make much difference where she was, I was only concerned with the discrepancies in your posts. Kinda makes anything you post after that suspect to me.

You can believe whatever the hell you want about my family member or my telling of the story. It happened years before online news so I can't google it for you. If you want to assume I'm lying because I don't have a link for a 30+ year old murder, knock yourself out.

In the mean time I'll assume you're lying because it's right here, right now, in post # 10.

this little girl was sitting on her front porch in the innercity...minding her own business and was shot

I didn't ask you not to bash gun owners, like me or not. I can see you get off on that even if you have to make up shit to do it. I only asked if in your rush to do so perhaps you didn't take time read things through.

I guess it's my turn now to say "Well just excuse the shit out of me!" I'm soooo sorry for pointing out your mistake.

BTW, I never posted it was my sister, I didn't specify what relation she was to me. There you go again, jumping to those conclusions. :sarcasm:

[Acebass]

215. Typical...

It really doesn't matter what I say...the link is there for anyone to read...this is just more gun nut bullshit trying to muddy the water...

The child that was hit while on their porch was shot a week earlier an honest mistake, when you have so many innocent children being shot by stray bullets it's hard to keep track...

When you are vague in your narration...

I lost a family member to violence, she was stabbed to death.

it would be easy to make a wrong assumption. Does it really matter if she were your mom, sis, aunt, cousin, illegitimate child by your 4th cousin twice removed. be more specific and provide proof and these things wouldn't happen...

As for whether or not you think what I say is credible...it really doesn't matter, I don't really care...

I just like bashing smartasses...you just happened along, thanks...

and with that I think you and I are done here...

[DanCa]

205. I couldn't live with myself if I accidently shot and killed somebody eom.

[Acebass]

208. Knowing that a gun I owned killed someone...

Is why I say what I do. Yes the person could have stolen my car and killed someone, or my carving knife, or my steam iron, but none of those things were made to kill things, my gun was...

I realized that if I didn't have that gun a man would be alive or at any rate not dead by my gun. I also realized that if it could happen to me then it could happen to anyone...

The gun debate is not about protection of ones self it's about fear and egos. It's about the NRA and certain men who haven't learned that the games we played as children are best left for children play!...

We would be better off without guns!...

[DanCa]

209. Funny thing is I grew up on the south side of Chicago

I never felt afraid when I was growing up . Of course albiet that was 25 years ago. As far as being afraid though no one has more reasons to fear than I do. I have young onset parkinsons disease. My legs could literally stop working at any minute (and have). Imagine not being able to control your own body, or that whenever you walk unaided you can fall down at anytime and break your neck.

Oh about people breaking into houses like I haven't had my house broken into. And I wont live in a world of what if's. If I did I would never leave my house thinking that something bad could happen to me. Hell I have parkinsons and a right wing thug as a President what the hell more could possibly go wrong in my life?

With that said I still believe that people can have guns in their home if they choose, I believe that they can go to shooting ranges and reluctantly go hunting. But like Johnny Cash also said "Dont bring your guns to town."

[Acebass]

211. You got it!...

Hey I've made deliveries in some of the roughest parts of Louisville, believe me being the only blond haired white bread in the store can make you a little edgy specially when you know, that everyone in the house knows you've probably got more money on you than they've seen in a month.
But I never felt the need for a gun nor was I ever in a situation where I thought a gun would be helpfull...

[Keseys Ghost]

217. Tough call; this gun thing...

Dangerous to have them; dangerous not to.

Tough debate.

I have to go with, "If guns are outlawed, only the goverment will have guns".

Everyone here makes sound points.

[Balbus]

219. I don't think it's a tough call at all...

Any law-abiding citizen who does not want to have a gun has a right not to own one. Who are we to force guns are people? ;-)

[Donald Ian Rankin]

220. I don't think this is a good way of arguing.

While I think a sane (e.g. roughly similar to that of the UK) level of federal gun control would greatly benefit America, I don't think that an appeal to emotion like this helps make that case.

Nobody denies that tragedies like this happen, and that they would continue to happen even if the US had better gun laws. The debate is as to whether more or fewer of them would happen with fewer guns about, and while the answer is clearly "fewer", this anecdote doesn't help make that case.

Bringing emotion and personal experience into a debate is almost always a mistake.

[Acebass]

241. So whats good for the Gun Enthusiast and the NRA...

Isn't supposed to be used by the other side. I think this is just what this argument needs! More human faces and more real life experiences...
No one says anything when someone posts a story of how a could, did or would have safed a life or prevented a crime, now we see the effect of too many guns and not enough gun regulation...
Emotion is what causes gun crime I think it's highly ethical to use it!...

[Donald Ian Rankin]

243. Let me turn that on it's head.

We shouldn't be using techniques that we'd consider illegitimate if the NRA used them.

Also, I don't think that this kind of appeal works, because people, quite reasonably, dismiss it as irrational and emotive. Not only that, but it fixes in their minds the idea that gun control advocates are irrational.

I think that what the gun control lobby needs is more repetition of the statistics that demonstrate that gun control will save considerably more lives than it costs.

I don't think "emotion causes gun crime, therefor it is legitimate to use it as a substitute for debate" is a terribly logical step, although I appreciate it's probably not meant to be one.

[Acebass]

247. Then we'll just have to agree to disagree...

Emotion+gun=gun crime...unless your just a calculated killer...

Yes I would love to see those statistics , and few more things pointing to a return of common sense when it comes to guns...

However here in the heartland there hasn't been much of that coming through, all we have had is first one bill after the other, supported by the NRA, that frees people to take the law into their own hands...When I was growing up we were encouraged not to do that, I think we should have dialog more in that direction...

We have social and economic hardships that have put stress on the middleclass. We have ethnic and religious turmol, we have a society thats about to explode, and all I hear are "Guns" thats the answer. I guess what concerns me the most is that me, or one of my loved ones could be next. I couldn't live with that if I knew I didn't do anything to at least try and inject some common sense into it...

Where are the other voices, I don't hear them!...

[Jack_DeLeon]

268. Irrational fear...

However here in the heartland there hasn't been much of that coming through, all we have had is first one bill after the other, supported by the NRA, that frees people to take the law into their own hands.

Since when is being allowed to defend yourself, and your loved ones taking the law into your own hands. Perhaps you will put the safety of your family in the hands of a government trained stranger, and I guess that will have to be good enough for them since you and those like you dont seem to keen on protecting them if god forbid it is ever necessary. Myself I care too much about my loved ones to put thier safety in the hands of a stranger. God helps those that help themselves.

When I was growing up we were encouraged not to do that, I think we should have dialog more in that direction...

Honestly my family didnt have much bias one way or the other. I was raised by a single mom, she taught me not to start trouble but if someone attacked me that I should do what is necessary to defend myself. I didnt grow up around firearms when I was little, my mother didnt have any and was not too keep on keeping one around, but she respects that I am an educated individual and can decide for myself.

We have social and economic hardships that have put stress on the middleclass. We have ethnic and religious turmol, we have a society thats about to explode, and all I hear are "Guns" thats the answer.

OH NOESSS!!11111!!!! Society is going to collapse. Funny for a non-gunnut you seem awefully paranoid. Are your type the kind that always claim gunnuts are paranoid.

I guess what concerns me the most is that me, or one of my loved ones could be next.

Irrational fear and panic attacks are a bitch. You or your loved ones could be next, so could mine, so could anyone elses. People die from all kinds of things all the time. A plane engine could fall off and crash into my bed room killing me right now, or your could die in a car crash driving to work. Its not good to let your fear eat you up.

I couldn't live with that if I knew I didn't do anything to at least try and inject some common sense into it...

Common sense doesnt mean lets strip people of thier rights just because something scares me. That would be like throwing all muslims into internment camps just because of 9/11.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

278. It's not entirely irrational.

30,000 Americans are shot to death each year, out of a population of well below 300,000,000. That's more than a 1 in 1000 chance, per person you know, of them being shot to death in the coming year.

If you consider yourself and your - say - 2 parents, spouse, 3 children, 2 siblings and an in-law - then there's a 1% chance of one of them being shot to death in the coming year, although obviously that's far from constant - it will be far higher for some people, and far lower for others.

And that's without even starting on your friends, or on non-lethal shootings.

To compare that, the odds of being shot are roughly 2/3rds of the odds of being killed in a traffic accident. Given that cars give not just more but *immeasurably* more benefit to America than guns, and are still heavily restricted, to me that's a compelling case for restricting gun ownership.

See my reply to one of your other posts as to why talking about restricting "rights" is irrelevant and misleading.

[jerry611]

244. But it wont solve anything at all...

To think gun control is going to make sad stories like this go away is a bit of a fantasy. There are more ways to kill or hurt someone than shoot them with a gun.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
-Thomas Jefferson

Now should military-like weapons be available? No. But I do believe it is more than acceptable for a responsible American to own a gun for protection of himself and his family. In my area, it takes police an average of 10 minutes to respond to a 911 call. A lot can happen in those 10 minutes.

[Acebass]

250. Yes it will...

Hopefully, someday you'll get it...

[Jack_DeLeon]

248. Yesterday at work...

I reprinted some photos for a lady, they were photos of her 15 year old niece that died a few days earlier. She was killed in a car crash, yet I somehow doubt she thinks that cars are bad and that they should be banned. If anything she probably blames the person who caused the accident which is logical, you do not blame an inanimate object for the problem caused by its user, you blame the user.

[Acebass]

251. Your really into this car/gun thing aren't you...

Do you buy a car for it's range or drop zone. What kind of a pattern do you get with a volvo as opposed to say a Chevy pickup...

This is the lamest denfense for guns I've ever heard...

[Donald Ian Rankin]

257. I'm sure you've heard all this before,

And I'm sure you feel that you have sufficient reasons to disregard it, but, once more with feeling:

It is, of course, a matter of costs and benefits.

The benefit to Americans of banning/restricting cars would be... well, it's hard to calculate, because it's so hard to imagine a scenario in which that happens, but if we assume that it would involve no more car accidents and the replacement mode of transport would be safe then it would be considerable.

The cost to Americans of banning or restricting cars would be absolutely collosal - I'm sure you don't need me to elaborate.

The benefit to Americans of severely restricting guns (to, say, UKesque levels on a federal basis, plus reasonably strict enforcement) would be considerable - many of the 30,000 Americans shot to death every year at present would survive.

The cost to Americans of restricting guns would be non-trivial - it would restrict people who get legitimate pleasure from guns, it would prevent people using guns for self defence, and some people would be stabbed by people who would otherwise have used guns.

I think that it's fairly clear that the benefits don't outweight the costs in the first case, but do in the second, so I support gun control but not car control.

I'm sure you've heard all this before, and disagree, but it's a sufficiently easy line of reasoning to trot out to make the gun/car analogy not worth bringing up, in my view.

[Jack_DeLeon]

258. So do the ends justify the means?

If its all about costs and benefits, and not about rights?

The benefit to Americans of banning/restricting cars would be... well, it's hard to calculate, because it's so hard to imagine a scenario in which that happens, but if we assume that it would involve no more car accidents and the replacement mode of transport would be safe then it would be considerable.

There would be alot less pollution, less need to foreign oil and wars for it, presumably some of the transportation might have to be replaced by walking, bike riding, horse riding which would force people to live more active and less sedentary lives which would benefit people's health and thus cut down on deaths. Ofcourse I'm not talking about restricting all motor vehicle transportation, I'm only calling for reasonable controls here, we can let the long haul truckers continue as normal after all goods need to get to market.

Personally I do not believe the ends justify the means in either the case of guns, or cars, or even swimming pools. People should have the right to decide for themselves.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

259. Yes.

Whether or not gun control is a good idea has *nothing* *whatsoever* to do with "rights".

A right is something members of a society choose to accord one another. At present gun ownership is a right in America; I think it shouldn't be. That it currently is is neither here nor there.

The notion that a right is an immutable thing that comes down from god or up from the ground is a silly one - if it were, there'd be no way of telling what they were.

There are some things that *should* be rights - freedom from torture, jury trial, etc - but saying "X should be a right" is no different from saying "X should be legal". Saying "X should be legal because it's a right" is meaningless.

If you want to justify gun control, you need to make the case that it *should* be a right, rather than simply asserting that it *is*. It's about right, not about rights, and that's all about costs and benefits.

[Jack_DeLeon]

266. So you are saying "yes, the ends justify the means."

We can strip people of rights if its for a good reason?

So we could also strip people of the right to free speech and free press too because muslims might get offended riot and kill people? :eyes:

The right to keep and bear arms comes from the right to self-defense. So please if you do not think that individuals have the right to use force to protect themselves from harm please say so.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

277. Yes, of course you *could*.

The difference is, of course, that it would be *wrong* to strip people of their rights to free speech and free press, but *right* to strip them of most of their right to bear arms.

Saying "people should be allowed to do this because it's a right" is purely circular reasoning.

In every society I know of people *do* have the right to defend themselves using force to a greater or lesser extent.

I think that people *should* have the right to defend themselves using proportionate force when possible.

If a society passed a law forbidding any form of self defence then its inhabitants would no longer, in any meaningful sense, have a right to it. They would still, however, often *be* right to defend themselves, which is why I think talking about "rights" in this any other context is meaningless and obscures the real issues.

We should be arguing about what is right, not what are rights.

I will also note in passing that I am not in favour of forbidding people from defending themselves usingg proportionate force with any means available to them; I proposing forbidding people from having access to one possible form of such defence, which is a completely different thing.

[Acebass]

275. Those who scream about their rights...

read too much into the second amendment...

This is for the purposes of a well regulated Militia. I would hardly call what we have today well regulated or a Militia. This amendment was writen in a time when our country had no armed services other than it's standing militia. Things have changed and so should the interpritation of this amendment...

Article
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

[Acebass]

274. Do you buy your gun for the same reason you buy your car?...

If so then you have the problem not I...

Driving is a priviledge, so should be owning a gun!...

[Acebass]

242. I guess my vision of America is entirly different from yours...

But let me tell you. In my America children can play, as I did in my childhood, without the fear of getting shot, that is for third world countries.
If you support that then you don't live in the same country as I do. You don't care for this country as I do. Guns have done nothing for mankind but kill, they serve no other useful purpose. There is no defense for them being here other than mans ambition to kill faster and easier. Live with that realization!
Yes we will always have to deal with mans aggression, but the lunatic fringe that says more guns and less gun regulation is the answer is totally insane. They, the NRA, the Republicans, the gun manufacturers, the gun nuts. Want you and me to be afraid. They don't care that the innercity gun crime rate is growing, it just means they'll be able to push more gun laws through congress.
Is this the America you want? I thought we had evolved from the wild west shootem up bang bang law and order days, evidently not!...
Wake up people. The path your going down is a dead end

[Jack_DeLeon]

246. Your vision seems a bit limited...

if that is all of your vision that being said there is nothing imcompatable with "your vision," and the right to keep and bear arms.

Guns were certainly around when I was a child growing up in the 80s and 90s, I didnt live with the fear of getting shot, there are plenty of kids out there that be them from households with or without guns go through life without the fear of getting shot.

Sure there might be some people who live in some rough neighborhoods who might have that fear, or there might be some parents who have some fears, but not all fears are rational. Just because there are guns does not mean you are going to get shot.

You can do more to reduce the risk of violence by removing the causes of violence while still maintaining the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Guns have done nothing for mankind but kill, they serve no other useful purpose. There is no defense for them being here other than mans ambition to kill faster and easier. Live with that realization!

That is your opinion and I believe you are mistaken.

If you support that then you don't live in the same country as I do. You don't care for this country as I do.

Just like George Bush eh? You are either with us or against us right?

[Acebass]

249. You should have been a ventrilquist...

you have such a way of putting your words into other peoples mouth

[Jack_DeLeon]

254. Ignore the points as usual....

We could do things to reduce the causes of violence in our society and thus reduce the ammount of injuries and death, but no you dont want to talk about that.

You would rather strip people of thier rights first and then maybe later fix the real problems huh?

Why dont you want to fix the real problems first, and leave people thier rights? Why does it have to be about control with you?

[Acebass]

267. Not in this chapter Jack sorry, one thing at a time...n/t