ADVERTISEMENT

Good blog on mass shootings

I'm linking despair to mass shootings, which includes massive debt which will be next to impossible for the person to ever dig out of.

I could somewhat see that. . . but much of what these people complain about in their rantings before this happens isn't student debt or something economic. It's often social.

You are often talking about people who are anti-social or at the very least strongly lacking in any social skills and just have a terrible time of forming solid relationships with anyone outside of perhaps their parents.

You don't hear. . . I can't get a job and I owe a ton of money. You hear "people don't want to be around me, be friends with me, girls don't want to date me." And in this frame of mind people turn this sort of thing into the fault of other people in which they generally take out these social frustrations on others.

Part of me wonders if the internet hasn't created an environment which creates more anti-social people? It could also help foster anger among people like this. . .

I could see how having anti-social people congregating together could build up anger at more social people who have lives in which a few of them might turn into violent action.
 
Oh wow, you really missed the point on that didn't you? Who pays for those databases? Who fills them up? Who maintains their integrity? Where does the money come from? Who oversees it all, and makes sure there is no corruption of data? Who is allowed access to it.? Did you really just ask me that?

We seem to be doing a fine job of this with automobile VINs and registrations.
That is paid for by auto owners, as part of the cost of purchase.

Pretty sure it would be mostly child's play to repeat this process for firearms, since we already have a partial database. If the NRA would actually support the creation of this type of list, to flag those 'at risk' for misuse of firearms, or who have verifiable criminal records, it'd be fairly trivial, considering how ubiquitous databases are these days. Google could probably set this up in a matter of hours....that's what they do.

But, lacking political support, and the support of the biggest gun organization around, it's a lot more difficult than it should be. Imagine if AAA were 'fighting' things like automobile Title Certificates, registrations, license plates and driver's licenses....it seems so loony when you apply the same logic to something 'not guns'. But everyone freaks out when we try to apply the logic to guns.
 
Joey, if the shootings were committed by people with no known criminal behavior, than what good does a background check do? What does it do to stop those that would just get their guns off the record? When does the government ever work this efficiently? How can they possibly implement something like this, with their already failed strategies? Where do you get the money? Where do you get the data? What you're asking for is dangerous, and you most of you government advocates don't even get that. You're opening up the doors into your homes even further. Eh? Eh? Eh?
Hawk.....I guess you can always ask The Founding Fathers, right? Better yet, ask Wayne LaPierre. One thing you can rely on from Wayne is an unbiased and balanced answer. I think ALL American ought to be required to carry all the time. A few deaths by hand gun in the defense of a "well regulated militia" is a fair exchange. People are way too upset about these gun deaths. Think of it as "God's Natural Selection" process......that's a good thing, isn't it?
 
I'm not sure Fred has been paying attention to the opposite side of the argument he is trying to make. Republicans (the sane ones) has said numerous times to get rid of gun free zones in some capacity. Whether it be training a select few teachers/staff members of schools how to handle a firearm and be able to protect the school from a shooter. Will it be fail safe? Of course not.

A lot of schools lock all doors except for a main entrance. It wouldn't be hard to funnel any ill willed trespasser into one entrance. (This might be more off base than I think).

In the case of Sandy Hook, the principal approach the shooter and was gunned down because she had no way of protecting herself or the students. What would be wrong with paying a select few teachers more money to go through training?

As far as colleges go, I'm not sure on the solution as I don't know how safe letting every student with a CCP to carry a gun to class.
 
We seem to be doing a fine job of this with automobile VINs and registrations.
That is paid for by auto owners, as part of the cost of purchase.

Pretty sure it would be mostly child's play to repeat this process for firearms, since we already have a partial database. If the NRA would actually support the creation of this type of list, to flag those 'at risk' for misuse of firearms, or who have verifiable criminal records, it'd be fairly trivial, considering how ubiquitous databases are these days. Google could probably set this up in a matter of hours....that's what they do.

But, lacking political support, and the support of the biggest gun organization around, it's a lot more difficult than it should be. Imagine if AAA were 'fighting' things like automobile Title Certificates, registrations, license plates and driver's licenses....it seems so loony when you apply the same logic to something 'not guns'. But everyone freaks out when we try to apply the logic to guns.
More government then, just what we need. That way it can fail even more.
 
I'll see if you can answer that for yourself.

Here's one hint: does 'the government' maintain the database of information for your credit history/credit score?
So now you want to involve private enterprise? Good when it's convenient eh? Who oversees them?
 
Yeah that makes total sense. . . something that happens in the United States quite commonly and almost never happens in any other industrialized nation is a problem that just can not be solved.
You're probably right except it does happen in every nation. And since you make the mistake of using industrial instead of developed, please explain why Russia who has very strict gun laws has a homicide and suicide rate double that of the US.
 
You're probably right except it does happen in every nation. And since you make the mistake of using industrial instead of developed, please explain why Russia who has very strict gun laws has a homicide and suicide rate double that of the US.
To be fair, Wouldn't you want to kill yourself and take someone with you if you lived in Russia?
 
So now you want to involve private enterprise? Good when it's convenient eh? Who oversees them?

Where did I ever state I was against 'private enterprise' or 'capitalism'?

And why, in heaven's name, would anyone need to 'oversee' them? It's CAPITALISM! It fixes EVERYTHING for us!!:cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
You're dodging the question.

No I am not. You've stated in other threads that 'capitalists do everything' for us, and that capitalism outperforms everything else. Why can't a capitalist mechanism be relied on for this function as well? Capitalism IS self-correcting, is it not?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
You're dodging the question.

I think the bigger issue here is that you've made the over-reaching PRESUMPTION that any lists/tracking for gun ownership or ownership restrictions mandate that 'the government' get bigger to do it. That is simply untrue; this is something that could be facilitated without 'more government'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
No I am not. You've stated in other threads that 'capitalists do everything' for us, and that capitalism outperforms everything else. Why can't a capitalist mechanism be relied on for this function as well? Capitalism IS self-correcting, is it not?
I agree with you, and now that I've gotten you to admit that, you can bow down and kiss thy hand.

Never, underestimate a persons ability to quietly lead you to exactly where they want you to go.
 
I think the bigger issue here is that you've made the over-reaching PRESUMPTION that any lists/tracking for gun ownership or ownership restrictions mandate that 'the government' get bigger to do it. That is simply untrue; this is something that could be facilitated without 'more government'.
Again, I applaud your new found understanding of this, and I would recommend spreading this new found knowledge with others.

Do you feel like Daniel Son? The whole time you think I'm just trying to get you to argue Capitalism vs. Government, and really what is happening is that I'm subconsciously teaching you the opposite with what you sought to prove.

Wax on, wax off.
 
I agree with you...

You then AGREE that we can implement a form of gun control, based upon better, more proactive screening of applicants.

You UNDERSTAND that 'government' does NOT have to be the administrative element for this. Amazing that it took you this long to comprehend this....
 
I agree with you...

Never, underestimate a persons ability to quietly lead you to exactly where they want you to go.

LMAO!!!:cool:

You HARDLY 'pointed this out to me'. You were ingrained in your 'government overreach' mindset on this issue, and only AFTER I demonstrated we could utilize a combination of government and private enterprise have you come to this 'enlightenment'.

Start thinking 'outside the box' more, and put away all of your preconceived 'government bad' notions and you may actually learn a little something now and then.
 
You then AGREE that we can implement a form of gun control, based upon better, more proactive screening of applicants.

You UNDERSTAND that 'government' does NOT have to be the administrative element for this. Amazing that it took you this long to comprehend this....
You're trying to spring a trap from the trap you're already trapped in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemorialRedWarrior
LMAO!!!:cool:

You HARDLY 'pointed this out to me'. You were ingrained in your 'government overreach' mindset on this issue, and only AFTER I demonstrated we could utilize a combination of government and private enterprise have you come to this 'enlightenment'.

Start thinking 'outside the box' more, and put away all of your preconceived 'government bad' notions and you may actually learn a little something now and then.
So basically you agree that we were arguing over the same thing? I never once said that government can't accomplish anything, I simply said that Capitalism is the main reason we became who we are, and the main contributor to our freedom.

Thinking outside the box has never been an issue with me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemorialRedWarrior
So basically you agree that we were arguing over the same thing? I never once said that government can't accomplish anything, I simply said that Capitalism is the main reason we became who we are, and the main contributor to our freedom.

Thinking outside the box has never been an issue with me.

No, the 'main contributor to our freedom' has nothing to do with 'capitalism' and everything to do with the Bill of Rights and our Constitution.

Capitalism has been able to thrive under a system of government that preserves these freedoms and enforces Rule of Law. Capitalism fares rather poorly in countries where Rule of Law is weak and governments are weak, allowing oligarchs to take over and/or bribery/corruption to thrive (particularly on local levels).

While we have plenty of corruption within our own system and government, we fare much better than many other developing economies. That is not due to capitalism; it's because we have a government that can pass AND enforce laws. Our government is however becoming less accountable to its people and more beholden to big donors and corporations, which is not a good direction to be heading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
No, the 'main contributor to our freedom' has nothing to do with 'capitalism' and everything to do with the Bill of Rights and our Constitution.

Capitalism has been able to thrive under a system of government that preserves these freedoms and enforces Rule of Law. Capitalism fares rather poorly in countries where Rule of Law is weak and governments are weak, allowing oligarchs to take over and/or bribery/corruption to thrive (particularly on local levels).

While we have plenty of corruption within our own system and government, we fare much better than many other developing economies. That is not due to capitalism; it's because we have a government that can pass AND enforce laws. Our government is however becoming less accountable to its people and more beholden to big donors and corporations, which is not a good direction to be heading.
And now you're a constitutionalist,,..yippeeee. I didn't even plan for that breakthrough. You are truly born again free Joey. Go and exercise that freedom!!

Those corporations aren't going to stop themselves and this government certainly isn't going to do it for you, not in its(constitution counts when we feel it does) mode that we are in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemorialRedWarrior
Lone..you have convinced me!
In fact, I think that EVERY voter in the country ought to be required to produce a registered hand gun at the polling place of their choice in order to be given a ballot! to hell with a "voter ID"....what can better legitimize a citizen than his being able to produce a registered weapon and his permit to possess!
This will kill 2 birds with one stone, as it were. We need more handguns and firearms in this country to keep us safe from eachother!

There once was an Indian whose given name was "Onestone", so named because he had only one testicle. He hated that name and asked everyone not to call him Onestone. After years and years of torment, Onestone finally cracked and said, "If anyone calls me Onestone again I will kill them!"

The word got around and nobody called him that any more.

Then one day a young woman named Blue Bird forgot and said, "Good morning, Onestone." He jumped up, grabbed her and took her deep into the forest where he made love to her all day and all night. He made love to her all the next day, until Blue Bird died from exhaustion.

The word got around that Onestone meant what he promised he would do.

Years went by and no one dared call him by his given name until a woman named Yellow Bird returned to the village after being away for many years. Yellow Bird, who was Blue Bird's cousin, was overjoyed when she saw Onestone. She hugged him and said, "Good to see you, Onestone." Onestone grabbed her, took her deep into the forest, then he made love to her all day, made love to her all night, made love to her all the next day, made love to her all the next night, but Yellow Bird wouldn't die!

What is the moral of this story?

You can't kill two birds with one stone.
 
And now you're a constitutionalist,,..yippeeee. I didn't even plan for that breakthrough. You are truly born again free Joey. Go and exercise that freedom!!

Those corporations aren't going to stop themselves and this government certainly isn't going to do it for you, not in its(constitution counts when we feel it does) mode that we are in.
Have to give you credit. If you actually were trolling this and getting him to argue his way into your point, then that is some credible work.

I've stayed out of this for awhile Joe's Place, but I can only say one thing.

Yeah, what he said. I think we aren't all that different after all
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawktimusPrime
I'm not familiar with Russian women besides the ones on the Hub. Simi everyone, type in Simi.
You're hopless, you still miss it. You're supposed to say "she wouldn't be doing much talking" or some variation that reinforced your masculine prowess. It was served up ready to eat.
 
And now you're a constitutionalist,,..yippeeee. I didn't even plan for that breakthrough. You are truly born again free Joey. Go and exercise that freedom!!

Those corporations aren't going to stop themselves and this government certainly isn't going to do it for you, not in its(constitution counts when we feel it does) mode that we are in.

Translation:
"You are correct, Joes Place: capitalism has NOTHING to do with 'our freedoms', nor has it been a 'main contributor' to them. Successful capitalism has been a RESULT of them."
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Have to give you credit. If you actually were trolling this and getting him to argue his way into your point, then that is some credible work.

I've stayed out of this for awhile Joe's Place, but I can only say one thing.

Yeah, what he said. I think we aren't all that different after all

Translation:

"All I saw here was H-Prime decrying gun control and 'registration lists' as another government power-grab and infringement on our 2nd Amendment rights. You identified that we COULD use an enterprise OTHER THAN government to provide an acceptable and independent registration service/control, with MINIMAL government involvement. Kudos for pointing that out to us!!!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Translation:
"You are correct, Joes Place: capitalism has NOTHING to do with 'our freedoms', nor has it been a 'main contributor' to them. Successful capitalism has been a RESULT of them."
It does actually have a lot to do with our freedoms, as it provides reasons as why not to socialize everything. Yes you are right, Capitalism is the constitutions gift to us all. You're a full fledged member of the Libertarians now.
 
It does actually have a lot to do with our freedoms, as it provides reasons as why not to socialize everything. Yes you are right, Capitalism is the constitutions gift to us all. You're a full fledged member of the Libertarians now.
In what part of the document that sets out to provide for the general welfare do you find the gift of capitalism recorded?
 
Translation:

"All I saw here was H-Prime decrying gun control and 'registration lists' as another government power-grab and infringement on our 2nd Amendment rights. You identified that we COULD use an enterprise OTHER THAN government to provide an acceptable and independent registration service/control, with MINIMAL government involvement. Kudos for pointing that out to us!!!"
I disagree good sir. What it appears to me that the Hawktibot leader was saying, is that you can't expect to do all of what you want done without bureaucracy. Even if the private industry was brought into this, you would need a larger governing body in order to monitor what is being done. The private entities themselves, could not, and would not be able to hold down the law side of this matter. A person could easily dispute the assessments, as there is little physical evidence of mental state.

You're advocating a system in which like the drug testing system, we would have private entities administering the tests. The difference here though, is that this isn't a simple urine test we are speaking about here. This is the very livelihood of a persons mental state that you are referring to. You can't simply walk in for one single appointment, and hope to guage a person by that one appointment.

Basically, your system would simply create more of a mess, and accomplish little. You would need regulations and rules to be followed, along with guidelines, and procedures according to law. This type of system can be ghosted through, similar to a drug/alcohol evaluation. People would simply learn to lie to keep from getting themselves on the radar, but that wouldn't actually change the state of their mental health. The dangers would still be there.

I just do not see the ability to do anything more than further complicate a system that is already too complicated. I also believe that either you being cute with your private over government argument, or you don't grasp just how much government would need to be involved. Regardless of their involvement, there would be failures up and down the board with this agenda.
 
In what part of the document that sets out to provide for the general welfare do you find the gift of capitalism recorded?

Right there with what you said Ned. Provide the general welfare,..welfare is the state of being, happy, healthy and successful. Capitalism can provide you with all three. How can you be successful if Socialism is pulling at your success in order to provide for those that refuse to put in the same effort you do?
 
I would also like to add Joel's Place, that the private side of this coin would be by far the most efficient in this coordination between government and private business. It's when you get to the governments side of this equation is where you will find problems.

If you are unwilling or unable to understand that, look at drug testing. Drug tests go off without a hitch, which is the private industries only job, and it's done according to how they are supposed to according to the procedures and regulations of how they are supposed to be.

Despite that, the drug use problem continues. Why? Because the government side of the issue is simply unable to do anything about it. Despite the bloat nonsense we see. DEA, ATF, FBI, local police, etc. All those entities, yet we still continue to have a major drug problems and arrests in this country. See Colorado for example of what has happened since marijuana has been allowed to be used recreationally.
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT