ForumGarden

Ahso!;1412827 wrote: Done! Just for the record, whether you and I discuss this subject today or a year form now is of no consequence to the families that have suffered loss from this tragedy. I have enough respect for those children and their families to be open minded enough to want to open dialogue between myself and my fellow citizens with the goal of hopefully coming to a meeting of the minds so to end this chapter in American history.

I have two 15 month old grandchildren, so for me, there's an urgency to this.

Also, I'm well aware of the reasons for gun ownership, however, when they're laying all over the place as is now the case, due to marketing fear by the NRA, it's out of control, which is being proven on an almost daily basis now.


I haven't seen any fear commercials by the NRA. I don't recall ever having seen any ads by the NRA.

Thank you for starting a new thread on this, I really hate seeing this kind of discussion in a thread started to mourn the loss of shooting victims.

Slogans. The NRA markets slogans. They do it on billboards, bumper stickers and they market fear to the readers of their magazine, emails and newsletters.

Remember this slogan: "I'll give up my gun when they they pry my cold dead hands from around it"

Know that one?

How about this one: "guns don't kill people, people kill people"

You don't recognize the fear of other people in that second one?

Here's a clip from a FOX news cast.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/04 ... ity-video/

SnoozeAgain;1412832 wrote: Thank you for starting a new thread on this, I really hate seeing this kind of discussion in a thread started to mourn the loss of shooting victims.You might want to take a second look at that thread. What it was was people sharing information as it came out. Mourning loss could also be a part of the thread, but it sure doesn't look like it was created strictly for mourning. In fact it was the forum owner who made the first comment that was overtly political in nature.

Ahso!;1412833 wrote: Slogans. The NRA markets slogans. They do it on billboards, bumper stickers and they market fear to the readers of their magazine, emails and newsletters.

Remember this slogan: "I'll give up my gun when they they pry my cold dead hands from around it"

Know that one?

How about this one: "guns don't kill people, people kill people"

You don't recognize the fear of other people in that second one?Got something from this century? Something not old enough to drink?

Ahso!;1412833 wrote: Here's a clip from a FOX news cast.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/04 ... ity-video/
That's a convention, not an ad campaign, and it didn't have a slogan. You have a wild imagination when your hate is sparked.

While in Hawaii recently - people are handing out gun propaganda on every street you walked.

Promoting gun use - shooting ranges - differents guns available.

surprising actually - Acc - this was Oct. 2012

Patsy

SnoozeAgain;1412832 wrote: Thank you for starting a new thread on this, I really hate seeing this kind of discussion in a thread started to mourn the loss of shooting victims.
I tried not-so-subtle hints, but Ahso's pretty thick when he sees a chance to vent his hatred..

And here I took it that you wanted to have an honest conversation. I guess I should have known better.

So since this thread is about your expertise of me, explain the hate part to me, would you?

Accountable;1412836 wrote: Got something from this century? Something not old enough to drink?I figured we'd start there. You object? Or is it that you can't defend it? The latter I suspect.



Accountable;1412836 wrote: That's a convention, not an ad campaign, and it didn't have a slogan. You have a wild imagination when your hate is sparked.It's a conversation about an NRA billboard and the message it sends. Too heavy?

SnoozeAgain;1412832 wrote: Thank you for starting a new thread on this, I really hate seeing this kind of discussion in a thread started to mourn the loss of shooting victims.


Accountable;1412838 wrote: I tried not-so-subtle hints, but Ahso's pretty thick when he sees a chance to vent his hatred..
See?

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/curre ... ost1412839

Ahso!;1412840 wrote: And here I took it that you wanted to have an honest conversation. I guess I should have known better.We can have an honest conversation. I simply explained why I had to start the separate thread instead of you.

Ahso!;1412840 wrote: So since this thread is about your expertise of me, explain the hate part to me, would you?I'm surprised you have the balls to deny it. I guess you're too close to see it, so it'd be useless for someone you don't respect to get you to see it.



Ahso!;1412841 wrote: I figured we'd start there. You object? Or is it that you can't defend it? The latter I suspect.Defend? There's nothing to defend. You claimed "Slogans. The NRA markets slogans. They do it on billboards, bumper stickers and they market fear to the readers of their magazine, emails and newsletters." And as evidence you serve up history rather than current events.



Ahso!;1412841 wrote: It's a conversation about an NRA billboard and the message it sends. Too heavy?Yes, it's a conversation. You said it was slogans. Your claim implies some kind of ad campaign. It's kind of pitiful to complain about the NRA talking to NRA people. Of course that rhetoric is going to be more extreme.

America: Too many guns, too little will to change - Comment - Voices - The Independent

Why debate it?

Scrat;1412844 wrote: America: Too many guns, too little will to change - Comment - Voices - The Independent

Why debate it?We're not. Accountable apparently wants to debate about me and my hatred.

Acc -There is current advertisement promoting guns

it's everywhere

Patsy

AHSO

you hate guns - I hate guns and I'm scared of them

I'll never have one around me ..

Patsy

Accountable;1412843 wrote: We can have an honest conversation. I simply explained why I had to start the separate thread instead of you.

I'm surprised you have the balls to deny it. I guess you're too close to see it, so it'd be useless for someone you don't respect to get you to see it.



Defend? There's nothing to defend. You claimed "Slogans. The NRA markets slogans. They do it on billboards, bumper stickers and they market fear to the readers of their magazine, emails and newsletters." And as evidence you serve up history rather than current events.



Yes, it's a conversation. You said it was slogans. Your claim implies some kind of ad campaign. It's kind of pitiful to complain about the NRA talking to NRA people. Of course that rhetoric is going to be more extreme.You're pretty simple minded and naive when it comes to business/political motives and strategies, aren't you? I said "marketing", which includes any communication and means meant to advance their cause, or in this case, gun sales and gun ownership.

The two slogans are relevant, like it or not, but I can see it's most convenient to not like them. We can move on to the Obama factor in the NRA's marketing campaign after you deal with the easy stuff first.

As for my so called hatred of, I presume, you mean the religious right and the NRA? It's not hate for the people involved, I fully understand where they're coming from, it's the ideology and lack of willingness on the part of many to be critical of what they choose to believe and listen to. It's similar to the "hate the sin, but love the sinner" slogan created by the religious right.

The fact that I've got the balls to be openly critical of both herd mentalities appears to rub you the wrong way. That's just too bad, this is a discussion forum where views are expressed. Nobody's trying mess up your tidy little reality show here. Either respond to what's said in a mature way or don't, it's each person's choice.

Patsy Warnick;1412847 wrote: AHSO

you hate guns - I hate guns and I'm scared of them

I'll never have one around me ..

PatsyWell, I don't "hate" guns, Patsy, though I can appreciate where you're coming from. I don't see much in the way of practical purpose for guns, especially when they are intentionally marketed in such a way that drives people to buy them by the pick-up truck load. They end up laying around for the wrong people to have access to them, not to mention the fact that many of the "wrong people" buy them. with what we're learning about ourselves as a species, I'm not even fully convinced there is a "right" kind of person to own weapons the likes of what we're talking about.

AHSO

I so agree with you

Patsy

Accountable, now that you've done your shtick for the gun lobby to insult those people who were/are victims of this tragedy by trivializing the fact that guns and the violence visited on children with them is an issue that needs addressing by your display here, have you anything of substance to say?

Strange that the argument goes that the right to own guns is to preserve freedom and democracy and that the restriction in owning a firearm would be detrimental to the ideals of a country built on self determination courage and free will.

Meanwhile America invades countries to stop armed struggles and insists that democracy is decided by the ballot box, imposing this ideal, this while holding a gun to the countries head........metaphorically.

An idiot went on the rampage in China this week, but without access to firearms he chopped and stabbed at the kids with a knife.

Not a nice experience for them but due to the simple fact guns were not freely available, they all survived with the most precious thing, the only thing that is not negotiable...................life.

All the smart arsed rhetoric about guns not killing etc etc is just that..... smart arsed rhetoric.

America would still have these kids today if there were no guns available for the disaffected nutcases to flex their so called 'freedoms' and 'rights'

The gun lobbyists are sacrificing innocent bystanders lives on the alter of their freedom and rights.



I have a six year old American grandson, I have yet to meet.

There are a whole range of issues that needs consideration when it comes to possessing and permitting firearms; from the associated feelings of overconfidence and power one experiences that tends to encouraging bullying towards those less likely to carry to simply making bad choices when reaching for them.



Recently a friend of my partner came down to her living room to see an intruder's leg coming through a window; she quickly went and retrieved her pistol and announced that she had a gun. The startled intruder said "oh sh!it, someone's home" and ran off. From that story, my guess is that the intruder would have run off even if the lady said "BOO!". After this incident the lady asked her brother to hold the gun for her at his house because she had an adrenalin rush from the incident and felt invincible. Smart move on her part.

All too often we read or hear about people who have made the wrong choice with their guns, the lady I mention is an all too rare exception.

Here's the question I have: Are we as a nation willing to amend the Constitution, or do we want to take the easier tack of violating the Second Amendment?

Is there a one-size-fits all national solution? I don't think there is. If we simply repeal the Second Amendment and leave the question to the states, then the more congested areas can make their common-sense restrictions without needlessly limiting the rural areas.

Bruv;1412862 wrote: Strange that the argument goes that the right to own guns is to preserve freedom and democracy and that the restriction in owning a firearm would be detrimental to the ideals of a country built on self determination courage and free will.

Meanwhile America invades countries to stop armed struggles and insists that democracy is decided by the ballot box, imposing this ideal, this while holding a gun to the countries head........metaphorically.



An idiot went on the rampage in China this week, but without access to firearms he chopped and stabbed at the kids with a knife.

Not a nice experience for them but due to the simple fact guns were not freely available, they all survived with the most precious thing, the only thing that is not negotiable...................life.



All the smart arsed rhetoric about guns not killing etc etc is just that..... smart arsed rhetoric.

America would still have these kids today if there were no guns available for the disaffected nutcases to flex their so called 'freedoms' and 'rights'

The gun lobbyists are sacrificing innocent bystanders lives on the alter of their freedom and rights.







I have a six year old American grandson, I have yet to meet.


I agree that america needs to leave other countries to self determination. I am a strong advocate of bringing our kids home and protecting our own borders.



But China is not a good example for your argument, IMO.

Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Perhaps if the principal was licensed to carry, this may have ended differently. Maybe better, maybe worse. There is no way to know.



I do think we are in for more off the wall activities this coming week .

Accountable;1412867 wrote: Here's the question I have: Are we as a nation willing to amend the Constitution, or do we want to take the easier tack of violating the Second Amendment?

Is there a one-size-fits all national solution? I don't think there is. If we simply repeal the Second Amendment and leave the question to the states, then the more congested areas can make their common-sense restrictions without needlessly limiting the rural areas.How would a society stuck in total disagreement on this issue such as ours is be expected to make either leap you're suggesting? At this point there are so many weapons out there and the divide is so contentious that neither solution would suffice. The carnage, in terms of physical injury and mental anguish would be too much to deal with.

The first thing that needs to happen is rational dialogue on the subject. This means that people of all sides would need to demand such dialogue and not tolerate any parties using hyperbole and slick marketing tactics. it would be a long and tedious venture, but I see no other way of coming to a meeting of the minds.

The question i have is: can anything be achieved in a capitalistic society such as ours, or does our system doom us to more and more of what we've been witnessing over the past 15 or 20 years?

Accountable;1412867 wrote: Here's the question I have: Are we as a nation willing to amend the Constitution, or do we want to take the easier tack of violating the Second Amendment?



Is there a one-size-fits all national solution? I don't think there is. If we simply repeal the Second Amendment and leave the question to the states, then the more congested areas can make their common-sense restrictions without needlessly limiting the rural areas.


What would you consider a rural population?

Ahso!;1412873 wrote: How would a society stuck in total disagreement on this issue such as ours is be expected to make either leap you're suggesting? At this point there are so many weapons out there and the divide is so contentious that neither solution would suffice. The carnage, in terms of physical injury and mental anguish would be too much to deal with.

The first thing that needs to happen is rational dialogue on the subject. This means that people of all sides would need to demand such dialogue and not tolerate any parties using hyperbole and slick marketing tactics. it would be a long and tedious venture, but I see no other way of coming to a meeting of the minds.

The question i have is: can anything be achieved in a capitalistic society such as ours, or does our system doom us to more and more of what we've been witnessing over the past 15 or 20 years?
I don't see what capitalism has to do with it, but I'm absolutely certain that you do. One thing I agree with you on is that such a dialog would be a long and tedious venture, which dooms the whole idea in our current society. We simply don't have the attention span to sustain such a conversation.

Perhaps we've passed the tipping point and collapse is inevitable. We'll follow Britain, Rome & Greece.

flopstock;1412874 wrote: What would you consider a rural population?
I was grasping for words. The point is that states and communities should be allowed to fashion their own policies. The Second Amendment doesn't allow for that, despite the courts pretending that it does.

Accountable;1412876 wrote: I don't see what capitalism has to do with it, but I'm absolutely certain that you do. One thing I agree with you on is that such a dialog would be a long and tedious venture, which dooms the whole idea in our current society. We simply don't have the attention span to sustain such a conversation.

Perhaps we've passed the tipping point and collapse is inevitable. We'll follow Britain, Rome & Greece.Too bad you have a defeatist attitude. Capitalism has everything to do with what shapes America and American lives. Seriously, it's not that difficult to recognize once one removes the blinders. Try it.

flopstock;1412871 wrote:



But China is not a good example for your argument, IMO.




What about Selma ?

Most countries have dark passages.

flopstock;1412871 wrote: I agree that america needs to leave other countries to self determination. I am a strong advocate of bringing our kids home and protecting our own borders.



But China is not a good example for your argument, IMO.

Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Perhaps if the principal was licensed to carry, this may have ended differently. Maybe better, maybe worse. There is no way to know.



I do think we are in for more off the wall activities this coming week .What does one have to do with the other? The China incident is perfectly analogous.

Only .48% are rejected on background checks.

Over 150000 were bought on Black Friday

1996gym class in Scotland 16 5and 6 year olds and the teacher

Norway 67

They are saying that Connecticut has some of the strongest gun laws.

Hungerford

Dunblane

UK Handgun Ban

flopstock;1412894 wrote: 1996gym class in Scotland 16 5and 6 year olds and the teacher

Norway 67

They are saying that Connecticut has some of the strongest gun laws.


I'm glad you brought those incidents up flopstock, as I was reminded of them this morning on the news. I also heard there are over 200,000,000 guns already in circulation in the U.S. & that even if all gun sales stopped tomorrow it wouldn't make a dent. Maybe it's the amount of ammunition that should be looked at.

Those incidents in Europe reminds me that when there is a disturbed young white male out there with access to weapons we are all potentially in his sites. I don't know what can be done about that.

NOTE to Bruv (& I apologize for seeming off topic, but he made a point of it, so...):

You haven't met your six year old Grandson? What the hell are you waiting for? I urge you to meet him as soon as................now.

It does always seem to be young white guys, doesn't it?

AnneBoleyn;1412898 wrote:

NOTE to Bruv (& I apologize for seeming off topic, but he made a point of it, so...):

You haven't met your six year old Grandson? What the hell are you waiting for? I urge you to meet him as soon as................now.


My daughter married a US Sailor she met in Italy.

They subsequently married in the US and have stayed there, after he got invalided out.

I have plans to visit next year.............fingers crossed, finances allowing.

SnoozeAgain;1412900 wrote: It does always seem to be young white guys, doesn't it?The Va Tech shooter was of Asian descent, if I recall. And the DC sniper was black I think.

Ahso!;1412902 wrote: The Va Tech shooter was of Asian descent, if I recall. And the DC sniper was black I think.The college professor who shot other college staff was a woman.

The exceptions that prove the rule Ahso!

I don't really count the DC sniper in this group... he didn't go into a public location and randomly shoot people, he systematically picked targets off over a period of time.

SnoozeAgain;1412937 wrote: I don't really count the DC sniper in this group... he didn't go into a public location and randomly shoot people, he systematically picked targets off over a period of time.the thread title doesn't separate the events. It's about bullets, rifles and guns in the general population as I understand it. the DC sniper stands.

Ahso!;1412941 wrote: the thread title doesn't separate the events. It's about bullets, rifles and guns in the general population as I understand it. the DC sniper stands.Which means when we add to this gang violence, domestic abuse, robbery and general threats, I doubt there'd be much in the way of one racial group dominating this.

The guy down in Florida who shot the black 17 year old teenager in his car for playing his music too loud was a white adult male in his 50's, I believe.

Here's what Huff Post's front page looks like at the moment. Look at all the gun violence.

Attached files

John Rosenthal reminds us that "Every day eight kids under 20-years-old die from gun violence in America. That's 56 kids a week, 340 kids a month and over 3,000 kids every year."

So 3,000 kids a year are dying from guns. America is completely insane.

BAN ALL GUNS NOW!



And don't give me that "only the criminals will have guns" crap. That's a lie. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and other gun watchdog groups, point out that more than 30,000 people are killed by guns in this nation each year, a figure that averages out to those 82 gun deaths per day.Time and time again, Americans are shot and killed while pursuing common, ordinary, daily tasks or while at play just because there is a “gun culture” ingrained in our society or even forced upon citizens despite the fact that a majority of us want some sort of control over this unrestricted proliferation of guns. Of the world's 23 "rich" countries, the U.S. gun-related murder rate is almost 20 times that of the other 22.

Quarterly Gun Murders by Country:

New Zealand 10

Great Britain 14

Australia 59

America 9, 369

Killing by guns at a rate of close to 100,000 Americans every three years is enough to make one wonder if we haven’t developed our own self annihilating WMD.

Might be a good idea to leave a link or two, Saint_.

How could that practicably be brought about, if the majority of Americans wanted it ?

Bruv;1412963 wrote: How could that practicably be brought about, if the majority of Americans wanted it ?Well, what happened last time was when we banned assault weapons the taxpayer bought back all the weapons to only have the entire thing expire ten years later.

....Accountable;1412818 wrote: I was pointing out that you were, sorry, are exploiting a horrible tragedy to push your personal agenda - before the bodies are even cold. I won't help you.

Attached files

Ahso!;1412962 wrote: Might be a good idea to leave a link or two, Saint_.


http://www.bradycampaign.org

Bruv;1412963 wrote: How could that practicably be brought about, if the majority of Americans wanted it ?


NRA Lobbyists. @#$%&*@!!!!