arora
(Banned)
- 4,098
Shooting in Washington Naval Yard
- Thread starter Johnnypenso
- 78 comments
- 4,848 views
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Sorry, I must have missed your response or I would have just quoted it:tup:👍
I'm not an American, but as Arora mentioned, constitutional rights and freedoms are not placards to be carried any more than guns are "toys for the right". The constitution and the freedoms it provides made the U.S. of A. the greatest example of democracy, freedom and prosperity in the world going on 2 and a half centuries and shouldn't be cast aside in favour of the cause of the day and PC thinking.
- 7,436
- Canada
- photonrider
(Bolded mine)
Could you elaborate on this, please, Slashfan?
A pattern I have noticed here is the 'mysterious stranger' that is a suspect, then is cleared, or disappears, or never existed. Other shootings have also mentioned something like this at the beginning of the event - for instance there are many similar posts like this in the discussion in this Forum about Sandy Hook.
You may not respond, if you wish (I'll pretend you've hit the ignore button
) but I'd like to know if you have more information on this phenomenon, since you are one of those people who has brought this up on more than one occasion.____________________________
The shotgun was a Remington, and the Navy Yard shooter had it disassembled; carried it in in a gym bag. It was reported that he used buckshot, and that he was hearing 'voices' in his head - as well as being kept from sleeping by some guys who were following him and bombarding him with microwaves.
?
Hopefully the truth will not be stranger than fiction.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
(Bolded mine)
Could you elaborate on this, please, Slashfan?
A pattern I have noticed here is the 'mysterious stranger' that is a suspect, then is cleared, or disappears, or never existed. Other shootings have also mentioned something like this at the beginning of the event - for instance there are many similar posts like this in the discussion in this Forum about Sandy Hook.
You may not respond, if you wish (I'll pretend you've hit the ignore button
The shotgun was a Remington, and the Navy Yard shooter had it disassembled; carried it in in a gym bag. It was reported that he used buckshot, and that he was hearing 'voices' in his head - as well as being kept from sleeping by some guys who were following him and bombarding him with microwaves.
Hopefully the truth will not be stranger than fiction.
Slash already reported on it and there it is.
- 7,436
- Canada
- photonrider
MYOB. Please and Thank You.
The request for further details was directly addressed to him, with the option of not responding, if he so wished.
👍
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
You posted on a public message board, it's everybody's business. If you want more private communication try a PM, works like a charm.
- 2,858
- Australia
You guys are missing the point. It seems that one of your goals is to minimise the hysteria, but you write things that I think encourage an escalation effect. Johnny, I was saying that you were using it like a placard, not that it is one. It was like you were quoting a chapter heading from the book: America - The Religion, or something. Or like if a kid asked "why shouldn't I take drugs?" and the response was "because the Bible says so". I know that you are far more capable than that, and could have used logic instead of blurting out what can easily come across as a smokescreen, or lazy knee-jerk headline.
Surely it's a little about "knowing your enemy"? If the aim is to avoid hysteria, give them what will help to avoid hysteria, instead of:
Johnnypenso: The Rights and Liberties placard.
MarinaDiamandis: The Condescension.
Arora: The... ah... all that stuff you did. Whatever it was.
Moral of the story: diffusing with logical information (with no concurrent back handed slap) will serve your aims much more than a middle finger with "Freedom M.F." tattooed on it. The more pressure that events like this put on gun rights, the smarter you're going to have to play it.
- 4,543
- Bay Area, CA
- Zenith113
They've given you perfectly reasonable answers. You just seem determined to twist their points into what you want to argue against.
I'm also having a difficult time seeing how this event "puts pressure" on gun right. If you had taken advice earlier and researched the gun laws in DC, you'd see that this event puts pressure on gun control.
DC has extremely tough gun laws, lesser only to Chicago and (arguably) California in the nation. The background check system that law abiding gun owners have to deal with supposedly in the name of safety was ineffective. The massacre was committed with a shotgun and handguns, suggesting that banning evil assault weapons and magazines with capacities of over 10 (banned in DC) wouldn't have an effect on the body count.
I'm also having a difficult time seeing how this event "puts pressure" on gun right. If you had taken advice earlier and researched the gun laws in DC, you'd see that this event puts pressure on gun control.
DC has extremely tough gun laws, lesser only to Chicago and (arguably) California in the nation. The background check system that law abiding gun owners have to deal with supposedly in the name of safety was ineffective. The massacre was committed with a shotgun and handguns, suggesting that banning evil assault weapons and magazines with capacities of over 10 (banned in DC) wouldn't have an effect on the body count.
Last edited:
- 2,858
- Australia
I'm really not trying to argue at all. There seems to be a switch that once thrown, lumps a person in to an anti-guns brigade, and everything thereafter is viewed in that light. If the "gun metal grey coloured glasses" could be put aside for a moment, there's actually advice on offer. Take or leave it, but I find that certain attitudes are doing no favours for those against tighter control.
I saw an interview with Gun Owners of America's Larry Pratt a while back. When challenged, it all turned into bravado and pontificating freedom rants very quickly. As an onlooker, it's not a good look, and he's quite possibly (ahem) shooting himself in the foot.
I saw an interview with Gun Owners of America's Larry Pratt a while back. When challenged, it all turned into bravado and pontificating freedom rants very quickly. As an onlooker, it's not a good look, and he's quite possibly (ahem) shooting himself in the foot.
- 4,543
- Bay Area, CA
- Zenith113
But that's exactly what you're doing with the pro-gun arguments you encounter...
Johnnypenso isn't Larry Pratt. Larry Pratt is Larry Pratt and he's not here. The counter-arguments you received weren't bravado or rants, that was Larry Pratt and yet you treated arora's, MD's, and JP's points as if they were.
It should also be noted that allowing your distaste for someone's delivery or attitude to affect your stance on a topic is illogical.
Johnnypenso isn't Larry Pratt. Larry Pratt is Larry Pratt and he's not here. The counter-arguments you received weren't bravado or rants, that was Larry Pratt and yet you treated arora's, MD's, and JP's points as if they were.
It should also be noted that allowing your distaste for someone's delivery or attitude to affect your stance on a topic is illogical.
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
Expand your view beyond the gun control issue and you may realize defending Constitutional rights is bigger than gun control. Government is the greatest example of giving them an inch and then taking a mile or the (hang on to your hats, deniers) slippery slope. Budge on one thing and they push harder on all things.
For example: Americans budged on cigarettes and food for "public health." Now public health is used to try regulating foods across the board. A farmer can't sell milk directly from his farm without being raided, what you fry foods with is regulated, sugar is being taxed, and even some have tried to limit the amount of certain types of drinks you can order at one time.
Or security: The Patriot Act and the NDAA severely violated the 4th and 6th amendments and now every airline passenger is treated like a criminal. That expanded into NSA spying on everyone. And if you question it, its security and you are just too ignorant to realize the threat of terrorism. If you ask to be enlightened they can't because its classified. This has expanded locally to warrantless searches and seizures, speed and red light cameras, and drone use at home. It has even expended into foreign policy, where the president can order bombings in countries we aren't at war with, and even of US citizens abroad. It's security.
And the biggest move is happening right now. Senator Diane Feinstein, in the name of security, wants to limit the 1st Amendment to only apply to the people she defines as a journalist. The 1st Amendment! This is considered the most sacrisanct of the Bill of Rights. It is what allows us to challenge government misdeeds without repercussion. It is how we are able to not live in fear. And she wants to make it so bloggers who speak ill of her can be made a criminal. This entire section of GTPlanet would have to be removed to protect Jordan from liability in the event someone made a character attack or linked to leaked information that doesn't come from an approved source.
Now, the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to allow us to protect ourselves against an overreaching government or enemies from abroad. In a world where DEA agents raid homes and assault innocent elderly women without a warrant or police reload twice to shoot an unarmed man 41 times, you have to understand why some refuse to budge on the one right that allows us to defend ourselves. Every tiny fraction of an inch we have allowed in the past has become a complete trampling of our rights.
Perhaps, to someone on the outside looking in, it seems an odd place to make a stand. I agree. I was yelling for a stand to be taken a decade ago. But some people are slow to realize the innate abuse that powers government.
That said, perhaps there is a balance, but the latest attempts at gun control were going beyond what the authors claimed it was, even removing medical privacy for potential gun buyers. They were asking for an inch but already grabbing a mile. And in the end it would have not affected this case. If anyone recalls, Joe Biden, head of the gun violence committee said all you need is a shotgun.
People aren't throwing up placards, they are drawing lines in the sand. Just because the men sometimes sent out by groups and/or portrayed by a biased media are poor spoken or even total idiots does not mean that those who agree with them are the same. Larry Pratt formed his group because they are so extreme they think the NRA doesn't do enough. He doesn't represent even a fraction of gun owners or gun rights activists. But he does make a good extreme, crazy guy to use when you want to make the people you disagree with look insane.
Last edited:
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
- 2,858
- Australia
Thank you FoolKiller for giving such a thoughtful response, and also for not playing the typical discussion shut down card(s). We're in a somewhat similar situation in Australia, having a magnificent country seemingly making some very poor decisions in respect to our future. I'll respect your words by taking time to digest them fully, as it is an angle that I hadn't been presented with previously.
There is a theory that some of us first world countries just don't quite get what we have, and in turn don't fully comprehend the protection required. We've never known the suffering that so many other parts of the world have known. You've brought a humility to the situation, and also shown that there are much wider principals at play, even if the attitudes can appear extremely topical and "one eyed". I have quite a bit of experience with mental illness and the state of play you describe reminds me of the struggles to discern what battles need to be fought within the mind, and what is real and what is paranoid fantasy. I tip my hat your generous contribution here.
There is a theory that some of us first world countries just don't quite get what we have, and in turn don't fully comprehend the protection required. We've never known the suffering that so many other parts of the world have known. You've brought a humility to the situation, and also shown that there are much wider principals at play, even if the attitudes can appear extremely topical and "one eyed". I have quite a bit of experience with mental illness and the state of play you describe reminds me of the struggles to discern what battles need to be fought within the mind, and what is real and what is paranoid fantasy. I tip my hat your generous contribution here.
Last edited:
- 7,436
- Canada
- photonrider
You posted on a public message board, it's everybody's business. If you want more private communication try a PM, works like a charm.
You missed the point of the exercise, and sullied the play by running interference.
So be it.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
- 7,436
- Canada
- photonrider
Nobody's perfect
True, true; I'm far from that, myself. Thank you for understanding.
Well . . .
Keep Calm and carry on Processing.
