I heard the shooter was the 24 year old son of one of the teachers.
Thoughts start to coaelesce in my mind about why another relative goes into meltdown and murders innocent children and teachers, and also destroys the lives of parents, sisters, brothers etc forever and a day .
So what set this guy off. I have been waiting to read or hear anything about what triggered this.
Could it be another case of ptw causing this to bring on that gun control issue again. It worked down here in Port Arthur, Tasmania. After that everyone had to hand in their gun, well they presumed everyone handed in their gun.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MymfzhPTRCQ
Quote from: biggles on December 16, 2012, 04:02:03 AM
I heard the shooter was the 24 year old son of one of the teachers.
That's what they said on Friday, but it was wrong, it was the 20 years old son of the first victim, not the 24 years old one. The school have also said that the mother never worked there.
QuoteSo what set this guy off. I have been waiting to read or hear anything about what triggered this.
There's no information about it yet. It looks like there was no suicide note or anything explaining his actions.
QuoteCould it be another case of ptw causing this to bring on that gun control issue again. It worked down here in Port Arthur, Tasmania. After that everyone had to hand in their gun, well they presumed everyone handed in their gun.
What's a "ptw"? ???
Whenever I see statements like that I always think "why should the right to have guns be more important than the right to live?"
In this case, the guns used were (apparently) owned by killer's mother, so he had easy access to them and had training (his mother took her sons to shooting ranges often). Why did she kept (apparently) 5 guns in her home along with a son with (apparently) "development problems" is also a good question.
Here in Portugal we can have guns, but we should provide a good reason for having one (like being responsible for the transport of large amounts of money or gold, for example) and we are limited to small calibre pistols. We can also legally own shotguns (we have many hunters, although we have mostly small animals, the larger animals we have are wild boars, and not the larger ones), so some of the murders are done using them (I witnessed one on September), and although guns are the most used method (27 cases out of 87 last year, 38 out of 99 cases this year, one of which I witnessed), when someone wants to kill someone else they will do it by any means (last year we had two cases of people killed with stones and one with a shovel).
That's why I think that the "right to have guns" can still exist but limited to guns that are mostly made for self-defence, like pistols, and just for smaller calibres.
Edited to add that I forgot to say that in almost all cases the victim and the killer knew each other and that the numbers above include people killed in hit-and-run cases.
the gun is just a tool, if someone wants to kill someone else, they'll find a way...Just a sad day....
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 16, 2012, 04:28:21 PM
the gun is just a tool, if someone wants to kill someone else, they'll find a way...Just a sad day....
It is just a tool. However, do you think it is a coincidence that places with high murder rates tend to have the most guns? It is definitely a double edged sword, like so many things.
The press will print unverified information just to keep from loosing a "scoop"...One AP writer even commented on the lamentable state of modern journalism as exhibited in the onslaught of misinformation stemming from this horrific incident..
http://connecticut.cbslocal.com/2012/12/15/as-shooting-story-unfolds-media-struggle-with-facts/ (http://connecticut.cbslocal.com/2012/12/15/as-shooting-story-unfolds-media-struggle-with-facts/)
As soon as they get the facts straight, they will editorialize until some other conspiracy evolves out of it...Just in time for the Made for TV docudrama...
what makes someone go and shot others before taking their own life?
how angry are people?
headlines for just this week not counting sandy hook
Police: 2 dead after shooting at Las Vegas hotel
http://news.msn.com/us/police-2-dead-after-shooting-at-las-vegas-hotel
*
Police kill gunman who wounded 3 at Ala. hospital
http://news.msn.com/us/police-kill-gunman-who-wounded-3-at-ala-hospital
*
Ind. man with 47 guns arrested after school threat
http://news.msn.com/us/ind-man-with-47-guns-arrested-after-school-threat
*
50 shots fired outside California shopping mall, causing panic
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/15/15937393-50-shots-fired-outside-california-shopping-mall-causing-panic
Quote from: Pimander on December 16, 2012, 04:41:51 PM
It is just a tool. However, do you think it is a coincidence that places with high murder rates tend to have the most guns? It is definitely a double edged sword, like so many things.
No, if there weren't any guns, then there would be more murders by knife, sword, baseball bats, poison, strangulation, bombs, cars (more btw), you name it they'd find a way....
I would appreciate it if, unlike what happened to a post I made in the last 9/11 anniversary thread, this post not be silently deleted by a member of the staff, because they feel that expression of the truth is somehow disrespectful to the victims of said incident.
I have never seen a single one of these incidents, where I have not been convinced, that said incident was a false flag event, staged by the American government.
The American government is currently aware of the fact, that at least an extremely high level of potential exists, for an attempt at armed revolution against said government, at some point within the next 5-10 years. If you do not believe that, I would suggest looking up information on the Department of Homeland Security's recent massive purchases of ammunition. I believe that the sole purpose of the DHS, is in fact to serve as a counter-revolutionary organisation. In other words, its' purpose is not to protect the American public from terrorism, but rather to protect the American government from the public.
Given this context, the government is attempting, on a continual and relentless basis, to manufacture public support for complete confiscation of all firearms from the civilian population, and to effectively abolish the Second Amendment of the Constitution. These shooting incidents are staged for that purpose. They are carried out by covert military individuals, and then a scapegoat is offered up to the public, in the place of the operative who actually committed the act.
The precise rationale for gaining support for the abolition of the Second Amendment, works according to the routine of "Problem, Reaction, Solution," described by several analysts. It is used by governments and various other organisations, to create an illusion in which the population are led to beg for the creation of a scenario which said government, or the cabal, wanted themselves in the first place.
1. Problem:- A mass shooting is staged by the government.
2. Reaction:- Massive hysteria and predictable outcry from the public. Calls are immediately issued to "do something," and often said calls will be instigated by people from within the government itself. A good example in this case, would be the call for new gun control legislation issued almost immediately after this shooting, by the psychopathic current Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg.
3. Solution:- In response to the clamour for gun confiscation and increased legislation restricting the ownership of guns by the public, the government is then perceived by the people to have legitimate justification for such, which it then of course passes. As a result, the government gets what it wanted all along, and the public are none the wiser. Well, most of them anyway. ;)
sadly Rock, i agree with you
Man with knife injures 22 kids at school in China
http://www.usatoday.com/news/
here are an equal number of young ones killed and no world wide coverage
go figure
Quote from: petrus4 on December 16, 2012, 06:09:54 PM
Calls are immediately issued to "do something," and often said calls will be instigated by people from within the government itself. A good example in this case, would be the call for new gun control legislation issued almost immediately after this shooting, by the psychopathic current Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg.
I disagree that the event was staged. I do think that it will be used to promote a gun control agenda, whether that is a good thing or not.
pimander your wrong,more guns equals less violence.
petrus you are right.
theyre always looking for the second shooter and the there is always a mentally handicapped person involved.
i believe this is part of mkultra .
the right hand is fast and furious and the left hand is brainwashing the tards.
notice kickass just was released at walmart and drudge just posted the kid couldnt feel pain just like kickass.
next ,wasnt there a runin with the counselor the day before.
i bet most of the dead adults were involved in something ,especially anybody involved in counseling.
first it was drug counseling for the nation and now its going to be counseling for terrorism.dont trust psycologist.
The gun is the weapon of the coward and the bully. :P
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 16, 2012, 05:56:48 PM
No, if there weren't any guns, then there would be more murders by knife, sword, baseball bats, poison, strangulation, bombs, cars (more btw), you name it they'd find a way....
The problem with guns is that they make it easier and less personal as stabbing, strangling, hit with a shovel, throw under a train, etc., etc., they just have to pull the trigger.
Wow, the gov' staged this? Now I question why I even read these posts. That's the most assine think I've ever heard. Sorry people very sorry. >:(I'm pissed
The obvious comparison would be between the UK and USA as they have similar cultures, media exposure, legal systems and wealth.
QuoteIn the US – population 311.5 million (1) – there were an estimated 13,756 murders in 2009 (2), a rate of about 5.0 per 100,000 (3). Of these 9,203 were carried out with a firearm.
In the UK – population 56.1 million (4) – there were an estimated 550 murders in 2011-12 (5), a rate of about 1.4 per 100,000. Of these 39 were carried out with a firearm (6).
http://fleshisgrass.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/us-and-uk-murder-rate-and-weapon-updated/
So the murder rate in the USA is more than treble that of the UK.
Now lets take a look at the number of guns per capita.
QuoteUnited States 88.8 per 100 residents
England and Wales 6.2 per 100 residents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country
Similar culture. Same language. Similar legal system and value system. ???
Quote from: petrus4 on December 16, 2012, 06:09:54 PM
The American government is currently aware of the fact, that at least an extremely high level of potential exists, for an attempt at armed revolution against said government, at some point within the next 5-10 years.
That "fact" may be just wishful thinking from those that dream with a revolution in the US. :)
To me, the US government does not (and doesn't have any reasons to) fear a revolution, because a successful revolution needs organisation, something I have never seen outside the major US political organisations.
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 16, 2012, 06:49:09 PM
Wow, the gov' staged this? Now I question why I even read these posts. That's the most assine think I've ever heard. Sorry people very sorry. >:(I'm pissed)
Yeah I am with you on that one... da gubmint has certainly much to answer for but saying they staged this and similar events is nuts
QuoteI would appreciate it if, unlike what happened to a post I made in the last 9/11 anniversary thread, this post not be silently deleted by a member of the staff, because they feel that expression of the truth is somehow disrespectful to the victims of said incident.
I have never seen a single one of these incidents, where I have not been convinced, that said incident was a false flag event, staged by the American government.
ok pets r us.. do you have any idea of how offensive you are..
or is that your goal?i have questioned your motives on a number of posts and have walked away
figuring you are just a troll looking for attention
a wannabe intellect looking to be leader somewhere somehow but without actually
doing anything but shooting off your mouth
rock isn't the only one pissed at your talk
hey Z..if the goal is more trolls like this one..
well..enough said
get off the couch ozzie and get a job
Quote from: sky otter on December 16, 2012, 06:11:04 PM
Man with knife injures 22 kids at school in China
http://www.usatoday.com/news/
In this China case nobody was killed.
Quote from: ArMaP on December 16, 2012, 07:34:48 PM
In this China case nobody was killed.
Give that man a gun and it would have been carnage.
I was just looking up some statistics yesterday the one that sticks in my mind is Chicago. In Nov 2012 alone , homicides went up 49% to 192 shootings, bringing the total to about 480 for the year ,well the year is not over, yet . They are said to have the "strictest" gun laws in the country and considering making the controls tighter. This is just Chicago not the whole state. I am of the opinion that taking guns from the citizens, in no way slows down the "criminal" as stated by some, if someone is going to kill, they are going to it, no matter what means. Here in Oregon we have a right to carry law. But as for the "Mall" shooting in Portland, it was posted all over the place that no guns where allowed, whether legal or not. In my feeble mind that is saying, Please Don't Hurt the Shooter. :o
The pro-gun brain washing is incredible. Anyone who cannot see that ready availability of guns makes it more likely that people kill is suffering from cognitive dissonance. There may be an up side to guns being available but it does not change that fact.
There is a simple reason why you are three times as likely to be murdered in America than in the UK. It is not rocket science. ::)
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 16, 2012, 06:49:09 PM
Wow, the gov' staged this? Now I question why I even read these posts....
Mission accomplished?
I will risk weighing into this tragic and emotional subject.
I say children and others are being murdered because of gun control fantasies.
Repealing the 2nd Amendment is fantasy. Total abolition of guns is a fantasy - this is not Japan, the land in which Yamamoto (architect of the Pearl Harbor attack) told the war council to forget any notion of invading the US mainland - 'where there is a rifle behind every blade of grass'.
We need to get real about guns and realize that hundreds of millions of them are not going to be given up - and that includes all the gun control hypocrites who secretly keep them (and then get embarrassed when they get caught). We also need to get real about our rightful distrust of a government that can legally strip search your wife for a traffic violation, fondle your disabled granny in an airport or search thousands of a prominent General's e-mail without any warrant.
Ask Native Americans if the Federal government can be trusted. That said....
We have a Federal Marshall program for airplanes that works. Teachers in Israel are openly armed and that works. We need a voluntary program to encourage training and certification of teachers and others in confidential concealed carry (who has the gun?).
Years ago, a student in Mississippi started shooting. A vice principal went out to his truck and got his .45 and pointed it at the student's head. It stopped. This looks more promising to me than more deadly fantasies about how banning assault rifles, handguns or tougher licensing will accomplish anything concrete.
I was listening to a radio show, the other day, and host insisted on only taking Canadian callers that day, as the US callers immediately politicized this tragedy.
It was interesting because the concensus was that Canada has the same amount of guns but doesn't seem to have these frequent mass murders like we do here in the US of A.
So the question was asked: what is the difference here? Why does this happen here and not to our civilized northern brothers and sisters.
I believe that there is a something terribly wrong with our society. Something quite complex and insidious.
What it is, I'm not 100% sure.
Some of the callers mentioned the roots of this country. Things like slavery & the Native American genocide & the differing relationships we had with the Brits. The host asserted that the problem with this country is that we have a 'get even' mentality. When we are done injustice or hurt - we feel like we have to 'get even'. In other words we are vengeful.
In a perfect world, I concede that the elimination of guns, more specifically the illegal ones - used for illegal activities, would be IDEAL.
I do not see that being a real solution, as the 2nd Amendment is so ingrained in what it means to be an American. People will fight to the end to preserve their right to be armed.
So a ban is seemingly off the table.
What then can we do?
What is wrong with us?
Quote from: Pimander on December 16, 2012, 10:34:55 PM
Anyone who cannot see that ready availability of guns makes it more likely that people kill is suffering from cognitive dissonance.
Agreed.
I truly believe that most Americans, if not most humans on Earth, are suffering from cognitive dissonance on one or more levels.
It seems like an effective means of mind control / subduing the masses.
Unfortunately, the very nature of US culture and tradition strongly argues against attempts at strict gun control. We're just not homogenous and have a permanent underclass.
I have long believed that, eventually, we MUST move into collective consciousness, more like bees and ants. I hate saying that but there is no alternative as technology puts more and more potentially destructive power into our hands.
Evolution has to make us psychically empathic or we're toast. I suppose you could make an argument that we can avoid that by just stagnating (as we seem to be doing currently).
Feel free to smack me with any intelligent optimism you might have.
Quote from: Eighthman on December 17, 2012, 12:34:15 AM
Feel free to smack me with any intelligent optimism you might have.
No optimism here.
Any nation that calls itself a democracy but proceeds to let George Bush junior lose the election and then govern them for years and subsequently re-elect him? Well, what good were all the guns then?
Guns to defend your democracy? Not likely. We have 6 in a hundred guns per capita and it would
NEVER be allowed to happen in the UK.A couple of facts for you.
Average firearms per 100 peopleUK 6.2; USA 88.8
% of homicides by firearmUK 6.6; USA 60
Is that difficult to understand, even for a child?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list
Quote from: Eighthman on December 16, 2012, 11:44:19 PM
Repealing the 2nd Amendment is fantasy. Total abolition of guns is a fantasy - this is not Japan, the land in which Yamamoto (architect of the Pearl Harbor attack) told the war council to forget any notion of invading the US mainland - 'where there is a rifle behind every blade of grass'.
Two points about that:
1 - today, the US looks like the only country that still uses the military to take over other countries, most countries have "evolved" to commercial take-overs.
2 - people in the US, apparently, can only feel united when they face a common enemy, when they do not have a common enemy they see enemies everywhere.
QuoteYears ago, a student in Mississippi started shooting. A vice principal went out to his truck and got his .45 and pointed it at the student's head. It stopped. This looks more promising to me than more deadly fantasies about how banning assault rifles, handguns or tougher licensing will accomplish anything concrete.
A system like the one Portugal uses, where people with some types of job have a licence to carry a gun would be enough,
after a change in the mentality in the US.
As long as the "shoot first ask questions latter" mentality remains, there is nothing that can be done about it.
Britain (and Europe) are sinking into tyranny and decay. The past month a number of big officials were exposed as pedophiles. A couple weeks later, "experts" suggested that pedophiles avoid prison and be given community service instead. Burglars may be let off by giving them a stern lecture and women have to be careful what neighborhood they walk thru to avoid being accosted by religious thugs.
Both my inlaws would have been condemned to death under NHS rules. Instead, they lived for many years with stents and dialysis.
Soldiers and police have joined street demonstrations in Spain and Portugal but lack the courage to oppose the banksters. I have to laugh at headlines predicting civil war in Greece, as if they had that degree of bravery left.
Guns did not stop George Bush because of his effective lies. It's entirely true that most Americans have given up and accepted a path to servitude. However, it makes no sense to acknowledge that the US is drifting into fascism and then seek to kick away the last possible crutch of freedom's support.
Giving up guns would be the last step, the final surrender of a once brave nation - although canceling the 2nd Amendment might lead to secession, almost directly. A nation that stood up to Hitler and Communism now seems eager to cower when threatened by misfits on psychoactive drugs.
Quote from: ArMaP on December 17, 2012, 12:51:37 AM
Two points about that:
1 - today, the US looks like the only country that still uses the military to take over other countries, most countries have "evolved" to commercial take-overs.
2 - people in the US, apparently, can only feel united when they face a common enemy, when they do not have a common enemy they see enemies everywhere.
Well, in regards to #1, I think that there are other countries that are still perceived as military aggressors, but I will concede that the US and Israel are in the biggest spotlight.
As far as #2 goes, I must say that it is hard to argue with that. It seems to be true. However, I'd say that the media and the government are largely culpable for this.
As to US aggression, we can only hope that: 1) the world's drift towards dropping the dollar as a reserve currency, 2) building exposure of war crimes and 3) the decline of Israel as a trigger all contribute to keeping this country out of other people's business.
Obama should be appreciated for his lack of enthusiasm for intervention.
Are you trying to link not having guns with paedophilia? ::)
Europe are sinking into decay whereas our brothers over the pond who are 3 times as likely to murder than we are are just keeping it so much more civilised. Black and white? Come on, get a grip. :P
You are 4 times, get this now, 4 times as likely to die in a car accident than you are by a gun. So stop driving and you might live longer.
guns rule.
its called mutual assured destruction.
plus if its a good shot ,death is quick and painless.
verses a bomb or a fatal knife wound to the back or stomach
yes americans at least show mercy when we murder.
there is no way for even our government to truly police us.
we are an armed mob.
we are both thrilled by extreme violence and humbled by it.
all it takes is a spark.
Yes we Americans are a mob. We murder with our cars by the thousands every day. Obama drops drone bombs on Yemen & Pakistani children every day. Yes we are a mob. Please.. Stop the vehicle carnage.
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 17, 2012, 04:34:37 AM
Yes we Americans are a mob. We murder with our cars by the thousands every day. Obama drops drone bombs on Yemen & Pakistani children every day. Yes we are a mob. Please.. Stop the vehicle carnage.
Sgt. Rock is right, stop vehicle carnage. People kill other people with knives, cars, bats, fists, and on and on. Should we ban everything? Israeli's bomb Palestinians and vice versa. Where does it stop; that is the question. How can we slow it down or stop it is the next question...we are not the only mob in this world. Human nature is the big enemy. IMHO
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 16, 2012, 04:28:21 PM
the gun is just a tool, if someone wants to kill someone else, they'll find a way...Just a sad day....
Sgt. Rock hit the nail on the head. If someone wants to kill, they will find another way. Having worked in law enforcement and corrections for the past 20 years, I have been privy to working in close proximity to the worst of society. They will find a way...believe me. In the county I live we have School Resource Officers in some of our schools which helps. The teachers have a specific set of procedures to follow and they are drilled in these procedures. Does that mean nothing will happen? No, but at least they have a plan and a procedure.
budgets get cut for the mentally ill and things go bad.
weekly supervision with somekind of workshops has helped my wife and i believe it is the way .
this makes them feel accepted in society and provides a since of hope.
we all need it as we are an example.
they are the natural outcast ,its easy to write them off until its too late.
living it first hand.but the best wife a man could ever want.
or we can run to the nanny state and ban butter knives and glass.
Deleted.
Quote from: Eighthman on December 17, 2012, 01:37:22 AM
Britain (and Europe) are sinking into tyranny and decay.
Too bad we don't have a LOL smiley...
Quote from: ArMaP on December 18, 2012, 12:18:20 AM
Too bad we don't have a LOL smiley...
If more Americans actually left USA, many would be shocked to discover that we have everything they have - just less violence, racism, homophobia, and more liberalism.
As I say, it aint black and white.
Without Britain and the USA Western Europe would be a NAZI fascist run dictatorship. So Europe has a lot to thank the USA for. However, a superior culture America does not have.
Quote from: Pimander on December 18, 2012, 01:02:18 AM
Without Britain and the USA Western Europe would be a NAZI fascist run dictatorship.
Don't forget the Soviet Union. :)
My last word on this.
Some nut job goes an kills innocents, and your answer to that is to take away my right to defend myself. Your answer to this madness is to make me and my family defenseless?
:o >:(
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 18, 2012, 01:30:12 AM
My last word on this.
Some nut job goes an kills innocents, and your answer to that is to take away my right to defend myself. Your answer to this madness is to make me and my family defenseless?
:o >:(
You'll never get it will you? You are far
MORE LIKELY to be murdered in your country because of your gun laws. So are children who do not have the right to own guns.
We have few guns and few murders. But don't worry, I know you will not grasp the fact that the solution to people being shot is
NOT more guns.
pimander..if you lived here your entire life you may have a different take on it..just sayin
today a school district about an hour from here in Butler, Pa. (if you want to look it up)
has gun carying security in all of the schools..
this was in the works to be voted on and was going to be done..last friday's tragedy
moved it up
and the part that made me feel better was that the men carrying the guns are all retired
state police...who would only draw a gun as a last resort
they are not hot head vigilantes but mature humans with years of experience
http://www.officer.com/news/10843509/western-pennsylvania-school-districts-arm-guards
Ok then, the solution to too many people getting shot is obvious. We need more guns. Everyone should have them, despite the fact that many people do not have the self control that should be required.
More guns is the solution to too many shootings. How could I be so stupid? :o
i wasn't callin you stupid or your idea stupid
only saying that if you had lived here your entire life your view point may have been different than it is
i don't believe any one is stupid
and i didn't say that this was the right or wrong thing..
only that it is what has been done
i don't think i stated any opinion..
Sorry Sky, I was being facetious.
s' ok...just didn't want you to think i was calling you stupid
Quote from: Pimander on December 18, 2012, 01:56:31 AM
You'll never get it will you? You are far MORE LIKELY to be murdered in your country because of your gun laws. So are children who do not have the right to own guns.
We have few guns and few murders. But don't worry, I know you will not grasp the fact that the solution to people being shot is NOT more guns.
I just couldn't resist.
Pim my friend you really, really don't know what you're talking about.
When someone is known to be armed and defended those that perpetrate these atrocities don't bother. Why do you think they always, always attack the defenseless?
They never, never try against the armed. That's a fact!!!!!!!
Now that's it for me.... 8)
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 18, 2012, 01:30:12 AM
My last word on this.
I knew you couldn't resist. ::)
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 18, 2012, 03:18:57 AM
I just couldn't resist.
Pim my friend you really, really don't know what you're talking about.
Oh yes I do. :)
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 18, 2012, 03:18:57 AMWhen someone is known to be armed and defended those that perpetrate these atrocities don't bother. Why do you think they always, always attack the defenseless?
They never, never try against the armed. That's a fact!!!!!!!
That does not change the inescapable facts that you have chosen to ignore. That there are few guns and few shootings in certain countries similar to the USA. There are lots of homicides, mostly with guns in the USA BECAUSE guns are widely available.
More guns are not the solution to shootings. But I don't expect many Americans to understand why murder is so common in their country.
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on December 18, 2012, 03:18:57 AM
Now that's it for me.... 8)
That remains to be seen. :D
????
I am retired corrections and law enforcement here in the states. I have dealt with the criminal element and in very very few cases reformed criminals (those who don't do the crimes anymore) and one of the things I have learned in 20 years is the criminal that uses a gun fears an armed citizen the most. The only time they don't is if they are more heavily armed. I am now in armed security (having retired from Law Enforcement) and now work in Hotels and Apt. complexes. The noncriminal element of society for the most part is glad to have armed security around. A good number of us have been through intensive training when we were in our various police departments, prisons and jails. I would say in the past 20 years things have gotten to the point where the younger thugs just don't care who they shoot but they do shy away from those who have the training. I worked with criminals for years and a good deal of them recognize me and my partners when in our security uniform Word gets around. One apartment complex we are in, most of the armed drug dealers left because of our connections to law enforcement. There are times in our county that armed citizens have actually thwarted crimes and in a few incidents had to protect themselves, their property or others. This has been welcomed. You will always have some (but very very few) that go beyond what is allowed. To obtain a concealed weapons permit in my state, you have to go through classes, fingerprints and background check, prove via certificate that you have been trained (vets can produce DD214 discharge papers - honorable dishcharge as training verification, pay some fees and then get your concealed carry license. As a security officer I have to have a Security license, A state firearms license and qualify on my gun every 2 years. Our county has had 34 deaths this year because criminals attacked people who were not armed. 1 was brazen enough to kill one of our deputies. Some of our schools have Armed School Resource Officers (Police fully equipped) in the school. I can only tell you from a law enforcement point of view that I welcome a knowledgeable and trained citizens help when I can get it. I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6.
pimander,what does your country do with the mentally ill ?
what do you do if russia was to invade your country for its resources?
Quote from: robomont on December 18, 2012, 09:43:44 AM
pimander,what does your country do with the mentally ill ?
Well we don't shoot them.
Quote from: robomont on December 18, 2012, 09:43:44 AM
what do you do if russia was to invade your country for its resources?
Wait for our nuclear submarines to knock out Russian cities and let the military deal with it.
Clackamas Mall Shooter Faced Man With Conceled Weapon
http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html
This may not be the place to put this. But is part of the Topic. Also , there is a chance not many will ever know.
how do keep your government from turning you into a slave?
Quote from: robomont on December 19, 2012, 12:12:50 AM
how do keep your government from turning you into a slave?
People are not slaves to their governments in the West. They are slaves to global capital which is independent of national government. Furthermore, guns have made no difference, otherwise the situation in the USA would be different to the UK and it is not.
The Soviet Union lost in Afghanistan because of an armed populace. The US was driven back in Somalia (Bush Sr.) because of an armed populace.
The US has lost in Afghanistan because of an armed populace. Unfortunately, being armed doesn't eliminate the corrupt and and evil Cabal. They're too big for that. However......
The Cabal are blocked at the local level by firearms. Yes, they can screw up your life and mortgage and your job but they have one final obstacle to eliminate: an armed populace. Meanwhile, they set up drones in the US, they take away the Bill of Rights, bit by bit, and spy on everyone.
Are you just ignoring my point on purpose or just don't understand it?
P
we all get YOUR point
but the world is about to go belly up so no one wants to fight with you..
;)
peace brother... ;D
Quote from: Eighthman on December 19, 2012, 01:08:01 AM
The Soviet Union lost in Afghanistan because of an armed populace. The US was driven back in Somalia (Bush Sr.) because of an armed populace.
And nobody would want to live in Afghanistan (people armed by USA when Soviet) or Somalia. They are not nice places.
Quote from: sky otter on December 19, 2012, 01:20:46 AM
peace brother... ;D
Peace to you all. I won't be shooting anyone. :D
There is a difference between a debate and a fight. I enjoy debates but I don't enjoy shoot outs.
Oh, and please allow me to rant a bit about a gun control argument that seems to border on insanity.
Guns don't stop our current tyranny.
There are highly educated people currently repeating this argument in the mass media. Do any of them really think about what they're saying?
OK, let's just say that my .22 rifle isn't effective against the US becoming a fascist, police state. Does anyone pause after saying that and think, "Hey, maybe we need to be emotionally aroused and highly upset by the fact that we are losing our freedom, for ourselves and our children, more than a single mass murder. Yes, I said More Than A Single Mass Murder, horrid as that may sound. What kind of a country were these innocent children destined to grow up into?
How does someone seriously consider the possibility of a bleak, dictatorial future and then just conclude, "Well, guns wouldn't help - Yup, it's hopeless, folks. Nothing we can do. Can't shoot the bankers so let's surrender our guns". The sheer ease of saying this appalls me.
Where is the horror, the revulsion, the shock, or the disgust over the consistent destruction of the Bill Of Rights ? How can people like Michael Moore scream for strict gun control AFTER exposing deep government evil such as 9/11? Really?
Can anyone understand that freedom is a greater priority than welfare, unemployment or anything else?
Why can't I find any pundit who will say, "You want gun control? Give us a government we can trust to respect our rights, our property, our privacy FIRST !"
You are not any more free than we are in the UK. You are just programmed to believe that every maniac or otherwise having a gun makes you more free. In actual fact it just means you are more likely to be shot be shot every time a person loses it.
That is why the situation is the same regarding freedom in the UK as the USA. The difference is we are less likely to get killed by a gun. Open your eyes.
@eightman,speak the gospel brother.
civil war is about to break out and they want our guns.i would lol if it were funny.
Quote from: Eighthman on December 19, 2012, 01:38:38 AM
Can anyone understand that freedom is a greater priority than welfare, unemployment or anything else?
Can anyone understand that freedom based on being stronger is not really freedom?
Freedom is not just for those with guns, and while some of those with guns could help other get their freedoms other people with guns could use them to get their own version of "freedoms", a version in which other people's freedoms were not allowed.
To be really free we need to have a mind that is free from prejudice and from arrogance, that's the only way to allow all people to be equally free, regardless of their age, sex, religion, whatever, and that's not something you achieve with guns, it's something that can only be achieved with knowledge.
Which one do you think the government fears the most: people with guns or people with knowledge?
QuoteGive us a government we can trust to respect our rights, our property, our privacy FIRST !"
Government is not something that is handed to you, government, in a democracy, is chosen by the people (both with and without guns), if the system doesn't work any more, then change the system by showing to all the people that it doesn't work any longer and try to find solutions for that problem.
If you want to be able to defend your home and family with guns from any attack, why don't you want to defend your home and family by spreading and using the knowledge about things (politically) work and how to change it?
Guns are not the only weapons, and are not even the most efficient.
Quote from: ArMaP on December 19, 2012, 02:09:11 AM
Which one do you think the government fears the most: people with guns or people with knowledge?
Having guns is not a threat to a government in the first place. Having knowledge is a threat to bad government.
Quote from: ArMaP on December 19, 2012, 02:09:11 AM
Government is not something that is handed to you, government, in a democracy, is chosen by the people (both with and without guns), if the system doesn't work any more, then change the system by showing to all the people that it doesn't work any longer and try to find solutions for that problem.
Like trying to get political power. If you believe in democracy and live in one, it is possible without guns.
Quote from: ArMaP on December 19, 2012, 02:09:11 AM
If you want to be able to defend your home and family with guns from any attack, why don't you want to defend your home and family by spreading and using the knowledge about things (politically) work and how to change it?
As opposed to saying, we have a gun so we are "free".
Quote from: ArMaP on December 19, 2012, 02:09:11 AM
Guns are not the only weapons, and are not even the most efficient.
One example of a more powerful weapon is propaganda.
If I spread propaganda that you are free if I let you have guns then you think you are free. In the meantime, I set up companies and banks that are not even based in your country and siphon off your wealth. Who wins?
Shall we start our run for office now ArMaP? ArMaP for President. I'll be your head of secret intelligence and spread propaganda.
our country is full of morons voting idiots into office .the morons are controlled by the msm.
the msm is controlled by the billionaires.
dont be a yesman for the billionaires.
because then your just kissing royal arse.
Quote from: robomont on December 19, 2012, 03:47:17 PM
because then your just kissing royal arse.
No, that's the Americans. :P
QuoteQueen's popularity sky-high in America on eve of Diamond Jubilee
As Britain prepares to celebrate Queen Elizabeth II's 60th year on the throne, the sovereign's popularity in the United States is at a 15-year high -- 82% of Americans say they have a favorable opinion of the queen in a CNN/ORC poll released Friday.
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/01/world/europe/queen-popular-in-us/index.html
In the UK, the Royal family have no real political power. They are seen by many as being inconveniently expensive. However, compared to the President the Royal Family are a bargain.
QuoteObama family 'costs taxpayers $1.4BILLION per year' (that's 20 times more expensive than British Royal Family)
Politicians looking for savings to deal with the national debt crisis should perhaps start by abolishing the President. Barack Obama and his family cost the taxpayer $1.4billion per year, according to a recently published book.
(http://sphotos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/c0.0.403.403/p403x403/424842_494892130533405_1833059564_n.jpg)
By contrast, the British Royal Family costs less than $60million each year.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2210323/Obama-family-costs-taxpayers-1-4BILLION-year.html
Me, I say scrap the Royal Family. I just wish that Americans would stop kissing their asses. :P
(http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/528412_185511834921061_1071413933_n.jpg)
The Kinder Surprise Egg is banned in the USA as it may be harmful to children. Oh the irony. :-\
Huh?
Kinder Suprise banned in the US?
I don't live in the US or check out kinder surprise but all the same I would love to hear if anyone in States has had kinder suprise?
:o
Quote from: Pimander on December 19, 2012, 04:37:53 PM
Me, I say scrap the Royal Family. I just wish that Americans would stop kissing their asses. :P
Zorgon may find it surprising that I would say this, but kings can still be useful. I just wish that the Windsors had devoted a little more effort to acting like one. I remember the rumours circulating after Diana's death, that the Duke of Edinburgh had supposedly had her assassinated, because her own level of charitable activity was making the rest of the family look bad. I do not have anywhere near as negative an opinion of the royal family as most conspiracists, but Elizabeth has been largely a caretaker monarch.
There has not been a confirmed terrorist attack in
the U.S sinse 9/11/01..Not even the fort hood shooting
was terrorism, just 'work place violence'..Has anyone
on this forum considered that this school shooting may
have been an Islamic terrorist attack, and Lanza just a
cover up action ?
Quote from: 08rubicon on December 19, 2012, 09:28:55 PM
There has not been a confirmed terrorist attack in
the U.S sinse 9/11/01.
Confirmed by who (or should it be "whom", I never know what's the most correct :) )?
Not even the fort hood shooting
was terrorism, just 'work place violence'.
Well, I have only read the last 3 pages just because I knew this would be mostly an opinionated discussion, and mostly would be based upon blaming the guns and not the "shooter", so I have just stayed away from it. But...........the above quoted statement is one of the biggest pieces of glorified B-S that I have ever seen.
The evidence clearly shows the Fort Hood act involved initiatives related to Islamic terrorism, and to call it "work place violence" is leftist make-speech, as we heard some use after it happened. And this type of reference is coming from the same people that called the Benghazi murders "a response to a video"!!! That to is/was pure undefiled lying B-S too.
Guns don't kill people, people do. Man over centuries has used every "tool" available to kill and to destroy, according to his own individual thoughts, sane or insane. Guns just happen to be one of the current tools!
You had better believe it - an armed populace does effect the heavy-handed actions of their government, as well as the actions of would be criminals!
rdunk, you are correct. Fort hood was islamic terrorism.
However, the U.S. government chose to call it 'work
place violence'. It is my opinion that sandy hook was
also islamic terrorism, and almost everyone has called
it gun violence..We are in a war for our survival, but
most of us do not even know , or care.
08rubicon
Quote from: Pimander on December 19, 2012, 01:13:55 AM
Are you just ignoring my point on purpose or just don't understand it?
With respect, I honestly think it is you who does not understand ours.
I have been in a situation where my home was invaded, and where, on calling the police as I was supposed to, they never came. I have also been in a scenario where I had to sleep for six weeks with a length of pipe next to me, because of an attempt to burn my house down; which eventually culminated in my steel mailbox being driven through my bedroom window, and my having to leave the property.
So if you wonder why I am libertarian and pro-gun, I can tell you that it is because I have known, on multiple occasions, what it is like to believe that my life is about to end, and have no ability to defend myself, because the laws of the country I live in, forbid me from owning firearms. For me, it is not a theoretical or abstract argument.
You wish to prevent gun ownership because you wish to save lives. But I will tell you that gun ownership saves lives as well.
I will also say to you, what I wrote on Above Top Secret, that anyone who wishes to maintain liberty must be entirely uncompromising in their willingness to do so; because the psychopaths are even more uncompromising in their longing to destroy it. It does not, and can not, matter what the psychopaths' arguments are.
Let me explain. First and foremost we were socialists. As national socialists, or Nazis, we presumed that government and the people were hostile to one another. Thus, we understood that the old German tradition of citizens' owning guns had to end. On March 18, 1938, we enacted our Law on Weapons and ruled that only government agents may own firearms. You can imagine my approval as I watched Senator Thomas Dodd craft America's Gun Control Act of 1968 by having our own law of 1938 translated for him by an official of the Library of Congress. My dear Julius, we can be proud of how similarly the two laws read. Those gun control efforts are naive and well-meaning, but their results will resemble ours. We told the German people that gun control laws were needed to curb gang activity and preserve democracy, but what those laws did was help us prevail.
...
Finally, dear Julius, you will remember what I frequently said and wrote in Mein Kampf: "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people." I explained that as long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. It is truly heartwarming to see how well this lesson has been learned by the American government. In the name of children, incursions into the private lives of American citizens have been made that we Nazis would have gazed at with open-mouthed admiration. Does it matter that our bodies failed as long as our spirit still triumphs? -- Adolf Hitler, posthumous letter (http://www.aapsonline.org/brochures/lapin.htm) to Julius Streicher.
Although I am aware that it is not your conscious intention, Pimander, you are currently acting as the psychopaths' advocate. I cannot urge you strongly enough, to read the above quoted letter in its' entirety, and to otherwise educate yourself in the tactics of the enemy.
I want to clarify something else here, because I know my previous post sounds fairly dark, and like fearmongering in general.
However, truthfully, it's not fear. It's purely a case of what the Greys ultimately taught me as an abductee; namely, that either I exercise my own sovereignty, or someone else is going to exercise it for me. There are also always going to be people like that around; the entire reason why the Service to Self polarity exists, is to serve as developmental catalyst for people. That's their job.
Hitler was one of them. Most of the senior members of any contemporary administration in the United States are others. It is vitally important to see the behaviours and motivations of these people for what they really are, so that you can make informed decisions about how to respond.
As an example of what I mean, when they rave about needing to ban guns to "protect the children," it is important to understand that, as psychopaths, they don't actually care about the children at all. What they care about is removing your freedom at any possible cost; but because they know you care about children more than almost anything else, children are simply the form of leverage they attempt to use, to get you to give them what they want.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urrRcgB581w
I'm just going to say it:-
I told you so.
Quote from: rdunk on December 19, 2012, 11:45:37 PM
You had better believe it - an armed populace does effect the heavy-handed actions of their government, as well as the actions of would be criminals!
I lived the first 11 years of my life under a real dictatorship (one of the longest in the world and the longest in Europe), and the powers were more afraid of what people could learn than what they could do, as the people that were ignorant of what was happening thought that it was a good government, even when they and their sons had to go to war in the African colonies for reasons that they didn't understand but that were "for the good of the motherland".
A cardinal that was close to the prime minister even said once that "people should only be able to write their names, they don't need to learn how to read a newspaper", but he never mentioned the thousands that had guns (as I said before, under some circumstances, people can have guns, and it was like that under the dictatorship).
My father was once arrested because someone told the police that he had a forbidden book (a really forbidden book, not one of those that we see referenced in Internet forums or in YouTube videos as supposedly forbidden but that anyone can get), but thanks to a friend that went to where my father had his coat and hid the book he was only arrested for the night, while the police searched his mother's house (this was before my father came to Lisbon and married my mother).
If the installed powers have allowed people in the US to keep guns this long it's because they were not really afraid of them, as what happened now could have been done before.
PS: during the revolution that ended the dictatorship, the revolutionaries didn't use their guns (it was a military revolution), only the political police used them on the people that were outside the building where they were hidden, killing one man.
Quote from: petrus4 on December 20, 2012, 07:02:09 AM
Thus, we understood that the old German tradition of citizens' owning guns had to end. On March 18, 1938, we enacted our Law on Weapons and ruled that only government agents may own firearms.
Ignoring the ridiculousness of someone writing a letter using someone else's name, that 1938 law made it easier to have a gun in Nazi Germany, they weren't banned at all, only Jews we forbidden from having guns.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKWgCRBR5qE
Clearer video than the last one. Watch the first 30 seconds or so very closely.
Quote from: petrus4 on December 20, 2012, 07:02:09 AM
You wish to prevent gun ownership because you wish to save lives. But I will tell you that gun ownership saves lives as well.
I don't wish to prevent it. It should be regulated. If you need one to do your job then fine. Gun ownership may save some lives. However, there are more people murdered where there are more guns and ultimately more lives are lost than saved.
No matter how much people plead, what I am saying will remain the truth. No matter how much it goes against what many have had drummed into them, the symbol of guns equating with freedom is utter nonsense in the modern world where governments have vastly superior weapons. It is a vestige of a bygone era when it did make people more free. These days gun ownership costs lives and I don't care how much you all plead on this, I am still correct so don't expect me to allow false logic and emotional pleading to win a debate.
It will NOT.Did your guns stop 9/11? Do they stop all the homicides by shooting? Do they stop children being massacred? No.
The easy availability of guns only makes these events more likely no matter how much you plead.