https://www.duffelblog.com/2017/10/gun-control-point-counter/



The following is a point/counterpoint discussion regarding the regulation of guns in the United States. James Bethel, a former Army infantryman who served in Afghanistan, will present the point. Alvin Rodriguez, a former Army infantryman who served in Afghanistan, will present the counterpoint.

POINT: I remember the first time I handled an assault rifle. Shortly after my entry into Army basic training, the drill sergeants explained that this weapon, an M4 rifle, would need to be with me at all times. We were taught everything about it, from how to use it, how to clean it, and of course, how to shoot it. And when I went to Afghanistan, I did plenty of that. But I don’t really know whether this same type of weapon belongs on American streets, especially in the wake of deadly massacres in Las Vegas, Orlando, and sadly, so many other places.

COUNTERPOINT: Look at this stupid liberal snowflake right here. I can tell he’s a stupid communist-sympathizing Killary supporter just by reading his first sentence, where he mentions “assault rifle.” That term is completely made up. No one would call an M4, or an AR-15, an assault rifle — except for a liberal piece of shit like this guy, of course. Did you even serve?

POINT: Like so many of my fellow Americans, I watched what happened in Las Vegas with absolute horror. That one man can acquire dozens of high-powered rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition, and then unleash it on unsuspecting concertgoers, should give all Americans pause. We still don’t know why he did what he did, but we do know that he had a large cache of weaponry.

Could this have been prevented? Could lawmakers pass laws that may prevent similar episodes in the future, such as a ban on so-called “bump fire” stocks that allow fully-automatic fire? Perhaps we can have a discussion about limiting the number of guns a person can have, or we can implement a system to flag people like Stephen Paddock if they purchase large amounts of weapons and ammo.

COUNTERPOINT: You know, I served my country and protected everyone’s freedom — especially their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms — when I was fighting in Afghanistan. And I cannot believe this liberal piece of shit is trying to take everyone’s guns away.

Let me explain something to you. Most American gun owners are nice, law-abiding people. All they want is to use their guns for hunting, personal protection, or, just to shoot for fun. The founders of our country enshrined gun ownership in the Constitution so that we could rise up and overthrow the government if it ever became oppressive.

And you know what other oppressive governments did? Before they took over their countries, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Hitler all confiscated guns from their citizens. So you agree with Hitler, huh?

POINT: Like many Americans, I don’t really think that banning guns is the answer. There are simply too many guns in circulation, and the fact is, most gun owners are responsible and law-abiding. But I do think that we can probably agree that something like preventing mentally-ill people from purchasing guns or requiring background checks before everyone buys a gun are reasonable steps to have in place.

These small steps probably would not have stopped the shooter in Las Vegas, but perhaps, it would have made it a little bit harder for him to acquire some of his weapons. Regardless, these small moves would very likely minimize other deadly incidents in the future, just as the 1934 National Firearms Act has made the thought of using machine guns in crimes virtually unheard of.

COUNTERPOINT: As a veteran, I’m appalled by this liberal snowflake’s ridiculous “logic.” If you pass a law against guns, it’s only going to affect the people who actually obey the laws. Criminals won’t care about it, and they’ll get their guns some other way. Oh, and by the way, there’s this pesky thing called the Constitution which, I think it’s quite obvious, you completely despise.

But don’t worry. I’ll be here to defend it from demon-crats like you.

See Also: Military Drawing Up Plans For Nationwide Gun Confiscations

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bump-stock-sales-las-vegas_us_59d61b0ce4b0cde45873319d

Gun stores nationwide are selling out of bump stocks, a device used by the Las Vegas shooter that allows a semiautomatic gun to fire as quickly as a machine gun.

Police said Stephen Paddock, the 64-year-old gunman, had outfitted 12 of his firearms with bump stocks, which he used to fire hundreds of rounds into a crowd of 22,000 concertgoers Sunday from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino. Hundreds were injured and at least 59 people were killed, including Paddock, who died from an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound.

While some retailers, such as Walmart and Cabela’s, discontinued the sale of bump stocks following the shooting, others couldn’t keep up with the demand. At least six online gun retailers examined by Newsweek had sold out of the device this week.

Slide Fire, a Texas-based manufacturer of bump stocks, sold out of the devices within days of the mass shooting. The company posted a note to customers on its website:

“We have decided to temporarily suspend taking new orders in order to provide the best service with those already placed.”

Another Texas-based bump stock manufacturer, Bump Fire Systems, noted on its Facebook page on Tuesday that its website couldn’t handle the amount of interest it had received this week.

“Currently our servers are down due to high traffic volume,” read a post on Bump Fire Systems’ Facebook page. “Please be patient, our IT Dept is currently working on the issue as fast as possible.”

YES, THE RABID WOLVES IN OUR NATIONAL PARK KEEP MAULING HIKERS, BUT THE WOLVES ARE ALL ACTING INDIVIDUALLY SO WE’RE NOT REALLY SEEING A PATTERN HERE

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/yes-the-rabid-wolves-in-our-national-park-keep-mauling-hikers-but-the-wolves-are-all-acting-individually-so-were-not-really-seeing-a-pattern-here

First off, our thoughts and prayers go out to the latest hiker who was mauled by a lone wolf in our national park. The rabid wolf in question acted completely on its own. This foaming-at-the-mouth wolf was part of a one-wolf cell of resistance. We have no reason to believe the attack perpetrated by this specific bloodthirsty wolf can in any way be linked to the hundreds of other wolf-related and rabies-related incidents reported in our national park over the past few years.

To be clear, we do not currently have a problem with a growing population of killer, deranged wolves slowly taking over our park and eating everything in sight. It may look like we do based on the facts and the evidence, but that is a straw man argument. There’s no pattern here from which we can learn and prevent further maulings, so stop looking for one among the countless rabid wolves terrorizing our park.

We really shouldn’t even be discussing this particular mauling right now. It just happened, so by immediately trying to connect the dots and call attention to our park’s rapidly ballooning population of delirious murder-wolves, you are politicizing a tragedy. And, since these lone wolf incidents seem to be happening on a biweekly basis, you shouldn’t ever talk about them. Look, we’re all frustrated that the wolves in our park continue to act individually in such horrible ways. But, we also can’t talk about it or do anything of substance to prevent it in the future because that sort of thing is liberal politicization.

If we were convinced that rabies is spreading across our park’s wolf population and causing these maulings, we would definitely do something about it. The evidence just isn’t there, though. For example, take the lone wolf from yesterday’s mauling. The wolf’s criminal record amounts to nothing more than a couple minor chicken coop trespassings. His neighbors and family say he was a quiet wolf who enjoyed howling at the moon and eating deer. Just because he was last seen foaming at the mouth and snarling like a demon hound doesn’t mean he’s some sort of rabid wolf, so stop trying to draw conclusions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2017/10/03/how-australia-beat-the-gun-lobby-and-passed-gun-control/

After the worst mass shooting in Australia's history, the Post Arthur massacre in 1996, the government banned semiautomatic firearms and certain other guns.

“Lynched in effigy, but no real harm done.” The words belong to Tim Fischer, Australia’s deputy prime minister in the mid-1990s — the moment when Australia radically changed its gun laws. He used the phrase yesterday when, in the wake of the Las Vegas massacre, I asked him about the political pain involved in taking on the gun lobby.

Australians are confounded by the unwillingness of American politicians to institute reasonable gun control. We performed the necessary operation, so why can’t our friends over the water?

It may be useful to recount what happened in Australia in 1996.

That year we suffered a massacre, much like the one that occurred in Las Vegas. For us it was Port Arthur — a tourist attraction created on the site of Australia’s cruelest penal colony. It was the place, a long time ago, to which we sent British criminals who re-offended once they arrived in Sydney. The carnage was about half as bad as what happened in Vegas, but that’s miserable arithmetic. It broke the nation’s heart. We had never experienced anything like it. It was such an offense to our image of ourselves: calm, laconic, peaceful, rule-abiding, a nation determined to allow the person next door to live his or her own life while we lived our own.

A disturbed young man — I resist the urge to tell you his name — killed 35 people using semiautomatic weapons. He was imprisoned for life. He’s still there, down in Hobart.

I visited the site of his crime not so long ago. It’s such a haunted place — full of layers of history, a place of unspeakable pain. The location of the massacre is preserved with great thought: It’s not on display; you have to hunt out the half-destroyed building nestled in a garden of sweet-smelling Australian eucalyptus. I defy anyone not to weep.

In the days after the crime, Howard and Fischer announced their plan — a ban on automatic and semiautomatic weapons.

https://www.indy100.com/article/donald-trump-supporters-vegas-shooting-stephen-paddock-gunman-white-race-thedonald-7980076?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100

United States President Donald Trump's ardent supporters frequently gather in one place on reddit, r/The_Donald.

The subreddit likes to think of itself as the last remaining bastion of reason and discussion, not poisoned by a liberal agenda.

Given this self-regard, no matter how laughable, it's surprising that they so quickly engage in doublethink and groupthink.

In the hours after the Las Vegas shooting, in which over 50 people were killed and 500 injured, members of The_Donald speculated that the shooter was an Islamist terrorist.

With no evidence, they began to speculate that the attack was religiously motivated, with an anti-west agenda, and began saying the attack justified Trump's policies hostile to refugees and Muslims.

When it emerged the shooter's identity was Stephen Paddock, a 64-year-old white man, the subreddit started saying the attack didn't make sense - stressing there was no political agenda to it. Or worse, that there must be a hidden leftist agenda, or that it was possibly a false flag attack.

Reddit quickly began contrasting the comments, showing how the subreddit only believes what it wants to, bending evidence to fit predetermined conclusions.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/02/investing/las-vegas-shooting-gun-stocks-sturm-ruger-american-outdoor-brands/index.html?iid=hp-stack-dom

Gun stocks rose Monday following the deadliest mass shooting in American history late Sunday night. A gunman in a hotel room at the Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas killed at least 50 people attending an outdoor concert and wounded over 400 more.

Shares of Sturm Ruger (RGR) were up 3%, while American Outdoor Brands (AOBC), the company formerly known as Smith & Wesson, gained 4%. Both stocks have tended to rally in the immediate aftermath of mass killings, which sadly have become more routine.

The Pulse nightclub in Orlando in June 2016. San Bernardino in December 2015. The Aurora, Colorado movie theater and Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. in 2012.

Investors had bet that these massacres would lead to tougher gun control laws, especially because of tough talk from President Obama.

The stricter laws never materialized. Instead, gun sales climbed during the Obama administration's two terms as gun aficionados bought more firearms just in case rules changed at a national level or in individual states controlled by Democrats.

https://www.consumerreports.org/charitable-donations/how-you-can-help-hurricane-victims-in-puerto-rico/

There are several charities you can donate to that are working directly on relief efforts there

Since Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico, celebrities like Jennifer Lopez and "Hamilton" creator Lin-Manuel Miranda have been encouraging people to make donations to help with relief efforts.

If you want to make a contribution, there are a number of charities that are working directly in Puerto Rico.

Save the Children, based in Fairfield, Conn., currently has about six people in Puerto Rico and it is trying to get more there. The organization is working with partners such as American Red Cross and FEMA in evacuation centers to make sure there are supplies needed by children, such as wipes, diapers, cribs, and playpens, as well as bassinets for bathing.

This weekend, as more workers arrive in Puerto Rico, Save the Children plans to also set up child-friendly spaces within the shelters. "Children are always the most vulnerable in disasters, so we provide them with areas where they can be safe," says Wendy Christian, who heads the organization's communications department.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/can-help-hurricane-victims-puerto-rico/



Islands throughout the Caribbean communities are beginning a long road to recovery from several major hurricanes that have ravaged the Atlantic. But Puerto Rico in particular is facing what local officials have described as a full-blown humanitarian crisis, with devastation they call “apocalyptic.”

Less than two weeks after Hurricane Irma made landfall on the island, Puerto Rico was hit by Hurricane Maria, the worst natural disaster the island has seen in nearly a century. Sixteen people have died as a result of the storm, according to the Associated Press, a number local officials expect to rise. The island has virtually no running water or electricity; around 80 percent of the island’s crops have been destroyed. Scores of Puerto Ricans are gathering around what’s left of the island’s cell towers, desperate for contact with loved ones.

Nearly all of the U.S. territory’s 3.4 million residents need assistance recovering from the storm. Here’s how you can help.

Cash. Most organizations are asking for cash, rather than supplies, so they can route help to where it’s needed most more quickly. Here are some of the largest groups with campaigns underway:

United for Puerto Rico (spearheaded by the First Lady of Puerto Rico)
UNICEF
Center for Popular Democracy
Hispanic Federation’s “Unidos” page
International Medical Corps
Former U.S. presidents have expanded their One America Appeal to include recovery efforts in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
Catholic Relief Services
Americares
Direct Relief
Save the Children, which focuses specifically on the needs of families and their children.
Global Giving has a $2 million goal for victims of Hurricane Maria
GoFundMe has also created a hub that includes all campaigns for Hurricane Maria. You can also find campaigns for individual families seeking help for loved ones.