The Republicans like to say “only humans kill, guns don’t kill.”

Well, guns do kill, that is their only purpose. They have no other purpose.

If we had sensible, enforceable gun laws, the 18-year-old Uvalde shooter would not have been able to buy the AR15 and more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition and 19 children and two teachers would not have died.

The Republicans don’t want guns regulated for only one reason, it would cut down on NRA profits and limit the amount of contributions to their candidates. They would rather get the big donations than worry about the lives of innocent people.

They use the brainwashing tactic “guns don’t kill, people do,” but it takes a human to pull the trigger. Otherwise, guns are useless. They are overlooking the words of the constitution, which say “well regulated.”

L. Davied Bond

Dickinson

12
6
0
1
14

(140) comments

Carlos Ponce

Fact check for L. Davied Bond:

The Uvalde killer did not purchase an AK-47 nor 1000 rounds of ammunition. What he bought (a Smith & Wesson M&P 15 and a Daniel Defense DDM4 V7 with 375 rounds) was just as lethal.

And you letter is contradictory.:

"They use the brainwashing tactic 'guns don’t kill, people do,' but it takes a human to pull the trigger. Otherwise, guns are useless." which tells us the human factor is the killer, not the gun.

And check with the DC v Heller Supreme Court decision on "well regulated".

In United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, 179 (1939) , we explained that 'the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense.'

The 1792 Militia Act passed by Congress referred to the militia as "every able-bodied white male citizen between the ages of 18 and 45".

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/07-290

Jim Forsythe

The Militia Act of 1903 repealed and superseded the Militia Act of 1795 and established the United States National Guard as the chief body of the organized militia in the United States

Carlos Ponce

Let's put them in order:

Militia Act of 1792

Militia Act of 1795

Militia Act of 1903

Supreme Court Case United States v Miller 1939

Supreme Court Case DC v Heller 2008

The first and the last are mentioned in the Supreme Court case DC v Heller. The two you mention are therefore inconsequential to CURRENT laws.

Jim Forsythe

The second Act, passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias. It conscripted every "free able-bodied white male citizen" between the ages of 18 and 45 into a local militia company. (This was later expanded to all males, regardless of race, between the ages 18–54)

Militia members were to arm themselves with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack. Men owning rifles were required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gunpowder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch, and a knapsack] Some occupations were exempt, such as congressmen, stagecoach drivers, and ferryboatmen. Otherwise, men were required to report for training twice a year, usually in the Spring and Fall.

HANK CHESSON

AMEN CARLOS

George Croix

Bait.

Don’t take it….

George Croix

Very similar thought process as the various MSMs had after a guy intentionally drove an SUV into a Christmas parade crowd, killing 5, memory serving, and injuring, what, 3 dozen more. They were so worried about actually reporting the facts which conflicted with their ideology that they reported “An SUV drove into a crowd…..”….

Same for the 62 year old really bad shot thank goodness, who shot up a couple dozen rounds in an NY subway car full of people, thankfully none dying, and the usual suspects media reported it focused on the extended magazine rather than the shooter characteristics, again ideologically inconvenient. No mention either and that he did so in a top level gun law city with red flag laws and elected leaders who hate guns for anybody but their personal security details….

In this country of late it’s common to want to lock up good guys guns and release criminals while at the same time demonizing Police and cutting their budgets…

Personally, I’m happy that I can’t understand that….

C. Patterson

Following the authors line of logic…

If all the he/him’s whacked off the wahoos we’d put an end to rape right? I mean after all its not the them thats committing the crime, its the thing…

Gary Miller

Patterson > I grin thinking about wahoo less liberals.Without a wahoo they might stop passing stupid laws. Oops! Some libs were born without a wahoo.

Emilio Nicolas

As some would be “conservatives “ were born without brains or common decency?

domenico nuckols

You can’t have a Tommy gun without a federal permit. You can’t buy a hand gun in Texas unless you are 21. You can’t have a grenade launcher period. You can’t have a nuclear weapon period. What is wrong with purchasing a rifle in Texas unless you are 21? Maybe having a requirement that you must have a federal permit for assault style weapon. No one is saying that you cannot have a fully automatic weapon is a precursor to taking away you second amendment rights. I don’t think raising the age to 21 for all firearms in the United States is either.

Carlos Ponce

"You can’t buy a hand gun in Texas unless you are 21." Depends on who sells it.

"Federal law also sets the age limit at 18 for private handgun sales (18 U.S. Code 922(x)(1) and (x)(5)). If a private sale is conducted with the help of an FFL dealer, the age limit for handgun sales is 21 and the age limit for shotgun or rifle sales is 18."

Ed Buckner

[thumbup][thumbup] Yes, Mr. Nuchols.

Emilio Nicolas

Guns don't kill people, people kill people WITH GUNS! Bumper sticker slogans are for simple minded people. The fact is that if we do nothing, maintain the status quo on guns, then the horrible situation this country faces with guns will not get better. If those that can't or refuse to understand "well regulated" were right, then we wouldn't be in this situation.

Carlos Ponce

People also kill with knives, blunt objects, fists, poison, etc.

Emilio Nicolas

Carlos, thank you for the valuable information. I hadn't considered mass murder with knives and blunt instruments.

Carlos Ponce

Considering the six killed and dozens injured by Darrell Brooks Jr. by plowing through a Christmas Parade, killing with something other than a gun should be considered.

George Croix

Mass murder with fentanyl.

Since we now see demands to make the manufacturer and distributor just as guilty as the end user, maybe our elected leaders should ban that instead of actively help it come into the country.

Mary Gillespie

Exactly. The FBI statistics show more people are killed annually with blunt objects than with all rifles.

Ed Buckner

https://www.alternet.org/.../comedian-factchecks-nra.../

Ed Buckner

Sorry for my earlier incomplete link--this should work: https://www.alternet.org/2022/05/comedian-factchecks-nra-attendee-hammers/?fbclid=IwAR0G1vunFFccFQIYOS2MGOfxKr9EAlATbp2IwkrEEtxrZ5qjdGAvXYXdBEM

Emilio Nicolas

Great video of someone faking intelligence.

Gary Miller

Mary > Guns may be the lest common way to be killed. Libs say guns are made to kill but more of them are made for target games than for killing. Target 22's out number big bore handguns.

HANK CHESSON

AMEN

Gary Miller

Bombs, cars, fire, water, and starvation.

Gary Miller

Guns don't kill people, people kill people? People use guns that can't kill by themselves to kill.

Gary Miller

Emillio > Every year or more often we have examples of members of "well regulated" militia killing. Sometimes killing other "well regulated" military members.

Ed Buckner

[thumbup][thumbup] Yes, Mr. Nicolas.

Pete Nanos

more people are murdered with hammers than with rifles in this country. Do we need to restrict hammer sales?

Ed Buckner

https://www.alternet.org/2022/05/comedian-factchecks-nra-attendee-hammers/ Mr. Nanos, do facts matter at all?

Pete Nanos

https://checkyourfact.com/2018/03/29/fact-check-hammers-fists-rifles/ Her you go Mr Ed . I know this doesn't fit your narative , but I found one that wasn't a leftist web site.Guess what?

Pete Nanos

PS Not that it matters, as libs will always muddy the waters when they are losing the argument., but no one is trying to ban knives , bats, hammers or any other thing that may be or has been used as a weapon. Your whole argument is that if we put up a second stop sign we'll stop people who are running the first stop sign. The root of the problem never gets addressed. It never has been the guns.

George Croix

Hey, Pete…

Check out this FBI:UCR report on murder stats It’s 2013-2017, but the increases in the rifles vs blunt objects categories during that time are consistent enough to likely be pretty close now.

If you lump clubs and other blunt objects in with hammers as the FBI does they were used to murder with over twice as often as rifles during that time period.

The numbers for what the FBI calls personal weapons, which are body parts, are almost as big as rifles and blunt objects combined.

I sent a copy via email to the White House…..holding my breath…

George Croix

You could check it easier if I included it.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls

Emilio Nicolas

You points rely on the lie that someone is after your guns. It’s really not about you or others with the 300+ million guns in this gun crazy country. It’s about setting limits to a growing problem. And as far as credibility is concerned, someone who’s premised on a lie is no judge. Keep your guns. I will keep mine. But I have enough.

George Croix

Sure…..

chuckle

Pete Nanos

Mr Croix, the audience you're speaking to has no interest in facts when the facts don't agree with their agenda. Mr Ed is a perfect example. His only agenda is to disagree with any conservative viewpoint. Nothing really to do with guns. You will find him on almost every thread parroting liberal/communist/progressive/democrat/socialist talking points. .

George Croix

Pete, this thread format for what goes where and when is such a jumbled clusterdoodle that I hope you find this post. The old listing in order of posting was much easier to follow (imo).

I don't think the various people herein and elsewhere, hel_, all over everywhere, who feel the need to tell us how much smarter they are than we/others are, that education and intelligence dodge, are bad people. Likely, just passionate in their beliefs, and can't understand anyone disbelieving. I see this on both 'sides' as it were of the GDN Chat Room Turf. I have begun to just skip some, but that is likely MY loss, ultimately....might need to reflect on it.

I DO learn much more from people I initially disagree with than from sympaticos....absent snark...either side.

I do know, after a long career interacting, supervising, and dealing with the run-ups to and results of people and events that ranged all the way from pleasant up to IDLH up to, sadly, actual loss of life, in both refinery operations and emergency response, that people will believe what they see and hear and personally experience over what they are told ...and if I have to tell you I'm the smart one, then I have immediately closed your ears, and may well then never get important feedback, or info to consider. Experience is also education.....

As in, I'd rather hear from someone who 'was there' than read it in the newspaper or on the net, when possible.

Thing is, I've ALWAYS, from miserable Monday Day 1, saddled with people who hated me just because I was a 'company man", tried...emphasis on tried.... to hear them all out, equally where possible, and apply whatever needed applying without favoritism, OR personal feelings rancor.....easier said than done....failed a, uh, few times...do so here, too...

Our emotions can get us.....I'm a Type A, uh, +..or worse...but typing on a keyboard in a safe space doesn't strike me as much of a challenge after the above, so, although at times failing, my goal is take most all of this, including my own input, with salt.....

Exceptions.....yep

Some stuff said in here belongs face to face, not on a keyboard...period...

I suggest we all work to minimize that, perfection being unavailable to us....

It also never hurts to admit error, which can...at times...make an antagonist into an ally, or at least able to stay in the same 'room' without locking and loading......

chuckle

Best wishes,

George

Gary Miller

George > The death of "subjects" has never been why socialists fear guns. They fear armed citizens will use guns to rid the country of abusive government. They want to "screw" the population with out fear.

Emilio Nicolas

Gary, your use of the generalized characterization "why socialists fear guns" is simply a lie. Your team aught to recognize it as such. First, not all people wanting more gun regulation are "socialists" any more than not all people opposing gun control are Nazi's. Second, to say people that oppose gun control "fear guns" is preposterous. Many own guns themselves, myself included.

Emilio Nicolas

Not that it would matter to some folks on this thread, but the "hammers and fists" argument is just another conservative deflection to the moronic. You want to add up murders committed by all kinds of blunt objects, then add up the murders committed with all kinds of guns. Oh, there goes the inane comparisons. Note: "The FBI’s numbers also show that of all the homicides reported, 13,663 were committed with firearms of any kind, or about 77%. Only about 4% of homicides overall were from hands, fists and feet." https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2022/05/30/fbi-data-deaths-hands-fists-feet-versus-rifles/9960682002/

Another consideration is that hands, feet, hammers, etc. are not inherently dangerous. Guns are. This is why they are regulated, like cars, airplanes, etc. However, they remain the favorite weapon of choice for mass murderers. Now please explain your theories to parents of murdered children.

George Croix

Tell it to the FBI, Emilio. I put up the link to their chart. The items in the back and forth were rifles vs bludgeons. Not handguns. Didn’t need a chart to know handguns are tops for murder. Anyone watching news knows they’re killing each other every week with them in cities nationwide in numbers that dwarf victims of other mass shootings. Evidently our President and your Party have no problem with number murdered but do with what, although in all fairness the President DID propose getting rid of the 9mm, but hasn’t made a photo op yet to the inner cities murder sites to comfort the families of those victims, who’s lives also mattered.

We humans are inherently dangerous as we’ve been killing each other since Abel became Statistic #1. Our weapons do not function without us. My guns in my safe or elsewhere are no more dangerous than a circular saw or cocktail fork until operated by a human with bad intent. Same as a Chevy or Toyota, themselves 2000 pound plus projectiles with high explosive attached.

Only on Disney do objects gets life of their own…

So, if we consider what must actually be employed to even make a gun function, maybe we should ban hands……

You go first…….

No child’s death is explainable to grieving parents.

And I’m not a progressive so I’d never try to hit them with politics before their loved one was even buried.

In no case is it OK to punish Emilio for what Fred did. You shouldn’t lose your right to drive or buy a Dodge Demon because Fred drove one into Pride parade….

It’s informative to read some follow up reports of and watch some interviews with families of victims and survivors of mass shootings. From my limited looking into it/them the opinions you assume must be there are not always. Some focus their anger on the person who killed their child, and care about that more than method. Some both.

I refer you to both Parkland and Santa Fe, for starters…

Statesman.com, huh. Yeah. Nothing more objectively presented than in Austin……

Gary Miller

If killing is against the law and if a gun can decide to kill how many guns have been convicted of murder?

George Croix

If a door lock had functioned/been used we wouldn’t be, either.

If people had reported this nut job who knew he was one, we also wouldn’t.

If an armed effective resource officer had been there the situation would have been different.

These are facts.

It is also a fact that the immediate response, as always, to focus on the type gun and non-criminals rather than the killer himself is just more politics. The big blue cities aren’t having dozens of murders and shootings on weekends, though, with focus group demonized weapons….

Emilio Nicolas

Nobody is "demonizing weapons". Most people in this country want more regulation on "weapons", not hunting or sport guns. Your position is extreme. Your list of things that would have prevented this situation are unrealistic. First, understand that people are very concerned about ALL the mass shootings, not just this one horrific event. Second, please reconsider your list, it calls for a lot of public resources to be expended just to fit your extreme view. Your list even calls for the community to check every door, window, etc. in every school, office, mall, etc. to protect itself at all times from even 18 year olds with military grade weapons, just to accommodate your extreme point of view. Do you really think that if the shooter in this case, for example, had encountered a locked door that he would have just gone home after all his preparation? Be reasonable and consider limits on guns, who can possess them and on your own point of view.

George Croix

Hey, Emilio...hope you're well.....

Sorry for the reply delay. Had to take care of a medical issue....

You know what the difference is between a 'weapon' and 'hunting and sport guns"...?

Nothing...ALL can kill, but not all users of any of them are killers.

I, last weekend, replaced a broken lock on my garage back door, then shut it to be sure it worked right...it didn't feel like an extreme thing to do. Or unrealistic.

If it's unrealistic to have armed and willing-to-engage security on site, actually be there and not on just a 'plan', then why do we have to pass by the same when we go for jury duty, for instance, and why was there supposed to have been that in Uvalde....

I respectfully disagree that there is the level of concern for all mass shootings as each weekend our big cities have mass shootings, and Congress did not go into a tizzy when a 62 year old black man shot up a subway in New York with a handgun, even though THAT city has top level strict 'gun control, and red flag laws (he was a social media posting nut job espousing among other things hatred for whites - a 'black supremacist'....)

My 'list' is so extreme? This country spends way more rebuilding what the mobs, the 'peaceful protesters', tear down, not even counting the gazillions wasted on crap that protects or benefits nobody but the politician voting for it, than it would cost to retrofit existing schools.

My 'list' does not calls checking everywhere all the time. You made that up. Stop that. The purpose of hardening is to NOT have to be everywhere at once. Restrict entry to controllable amount, while still allowing emergency egress quickly. It's not difficult. The electric door locks on your car or truck do similar every time you get in it....I'm also talking about SCHOOLS....you are the one who added essentially everywhere...why? The federal and state government doesn't require our kids to attend offices and malls and etc.

My 'extreme' view is that somebody who commits no crime should suffer no consequences for others doing so.

A 'military grade' weapon is, when one is discussing rifles, nearly always select fire. The term itself is yet another example of deflection and mass indoctrination onto focus grouped catch phrases. Actors on TV in war movies wear 'military grade' gear, but that doesn't make them Navy SEALS.....or killers. I've got a safe full of what you would call 'military grade' various firearms..... why do or should you care that I do?. I've done nothing wrong, and am no more required to justify to you than you are to me....we are free and responsible citizens. So far......

Emilio, I say NO weapon, firearms or knives or sharp sticks or Chevy Tahoe or others, should be used to inflict harm or death on innocent people. I'm not choosy about that. And 'banning' is like putting a sawhorse across a walkway. Anyone intent on doing so will get around it. And, unless you confiscate, which means steal from honest people, you solve nothing more than the 20 plus year ago "assault weapon ban"...nothing, except raise funds for campaigns...

Good question......Do I really think the Uvalde shooter would have just gone home if all doors were locked?.

No, I don't.

In fact, he might have went somewhere else and shot people there. Like the two he shot at when he wrecked the truck. Our subject, here, is schools.

I DO think and don't have to guess about it that IF locked up, he'd either not have gotten inside at all, or been delayed. Likely enough for that armed resource officer that was SUPPOSED to be there to engage. Even a locked interior CLASSROOM door is harder to get through than an open one. That's 'extreme'...?? Wow....

Add bullet resistant 'glass' and security doors that work and a remote activated all doors locks system, which CAN be retrofitted to make every school now with windows and doors better than they are today to deter unwanted entry. And the feds, since they are the loudest voices, should use our already paid in tax monies to pay for it all, and stop building bridges to nowhere and such.....

NO local school district should be out a dime of local taxes to do these 'extreme"ly simple things that WILL make it harder if not 100% to keep killers out of our children's schools...no matter what they show up with....the mouth breathers in Congress and activists everywhere on all sides could get on board with this TOMORROW...and could have last week/month/year....and actually do something to block criminals, without doing so to honest people. That's 'extreme".

Here's a thought, what if the people the Uvalde killer shot at first, where he wrecked that truck, had been armed and able and willing to respond with THEIR firearm, similar to Sutherland Springs.... THAT would have been better than a couple dozen armed responders standing around outside while listening to gunshots

'Extreme"? Tell that to the not dead people we just read about in the last few days where a legally armed woman shot and killed a man firing his rifle into a crowd...

Hopefully, at LEAST, we'll get going to do something workable and actually usefull to protect our kids as much as possible. In the future, that should include ground-up design of schools to repel intruders.

IMHO, as always...

Thanks for you input.

ps: Security, business or personal,by nature adds inconvenience and expense. Cannot have the former without the two latter. We can either keep talking or get to walking on what just might work most often....

Emilio Nicolas

Thank you for your more reasonable response. Thoughtfulness works better. Unfortunately, you lead to the same assumptions and conclusions, that doing little or nothing with gun control will make no difference. i suppose, IMHO, there really isn't a need for conversation or debate on guns, we all just need to adjust to the reality of what this country is like today. One question: do assault style weapons with high velocity bullets improve the taste of venison?

George Croix

You are welcome, Emilio.

To answer your question, first, the firearms that are assault weapon look likes such as the AR will typically have a 16” barrel in the carbine versions that are most common and fire typically the little .223/5.56mm round. There is nothing magic about it, or “extra deadly” like one hears from the various tube talking heads. Eugene Stoner in late 50s was the father of the basic design and the goal was lightweight maneuverable rifle firing a small/lightweight round so more rounds could be carried for the same weight load. The .308 round is more effective for most things but it’s also about 3 times or so heavier in the common about 147/150 gr. Rest assured that a hit on anything with the same impact location and same bullet design will produce significantly more damage from the .243/.308.270/etc. common “deer” rounds than the little .223/5.56 will. Can’t suspend physics…and nobody was ever harmed by a pistol grip, flash hider, or such “characteristics” - looks do not produce an increase in lethality, absent a visit from Medusa…

Not that long ago, to an old guy like me, you could not hunt deer in Texas with a .223 because it’s so much lower powered comparatively than typical “deer” cartridges as commonly referred to. I’ve never shot a deer with one. I have decreased the East Texas feral hog population significantly but it’s not ideal for them and requires careful hits and some followup a lot of times.

I don’t eat wild hog meat. I give it away when possible, and kill every last one of the ground destroying fawn eating deer feed stealing big woods rats as I can…most to date is 4 from a single bunch which I could never do with my other rifle designs.

Gary Miller

Correction Emilio > The guns were not military quality. They were look like, not function like.

Pete Nanos

What , exactly is unrealistic? I don't care what rules you make concerning guns, criminals will find a way to get them. Unfortunately , those who want to use guns for self defense will be the ones affected because they will obey the law. Thus leaving people defenseless. Until we face the reality that it's mentally ill people who commit these crimes and set up a system to identify these people ahead of time, we will not be doing anything but making feel good laws that don't work. If we train people to do things to prevent easy access we at least give law enforcement time to respond. However , if we do the training and people ignore it, then all the training done is useless. Armed guards and proper training is a start where schools are involved and that should be our first priority. Once we can agree this is a start we can move ahead to address the next issue.

Ed Buckner

Mr. Nanos, a serious question: do you oppose all criminal laws? Should murdering children be illegal? What's the point, since child murderers will find a way around the law and kill anyway? Of course no criminal law is completely effective at stopping behavior. And a madman intent on killing children won't be stopped by a law. But a gun store owner can probably be induced not to sell an 18-y.o. madman a firearm. And that won't magically stop all harm--but it can improve the odds. And that matters.

Pete Nanos

being able to reply to the correct post would be helpful. While I admire your faith in people,I would caution that having good faith is exactly how we got where we are. We have allowed the tail to wag the dog for too long. The time to speak up is now while we still have a Constitution or for that matter a country. You can see how much damage can be done in so little time.

George Croix

In the old format, you just put the replied to persons name at the head of your reply, and everything stayed in posted or. So, one could pretty easily carry on a specific exchange in timeline by simply looking for one's own name. This mess jerks around like a bunch of tweekers when a Police car drives down the road.

Actually, I have little faith in my fellow man, but, for me, unless I do what I've learned to do, I have none.....

Even for a Type A+ cynic, that's a tough place to be.

George Croix

Ps: It is not effective response to have armed officers standing outside doing nothing for an hour, so save the deflections. No ‘aha’ moment exists…

Emilio Nicolas

George, it almost sounds like you know what you are talking about ... but you don't. These rounds are designed to tumble, unlike those used in sport. That tumbling is what makes them so much deadlier. They also pack a much higher velocity punch than the rounds you compare them to. Look into it, you may realize there is a reason our military uses them. Or, maybe you did know this, but were being disingenuous.

George Croix

No, Emilio, they are not “designed to tumble”.

I already mentioned the somewhat higher velocity of the 5.56 vs .223. The 5.56 as I said operates at higher pressure which in the same barrel/chamber equals higher velocity…as said. It’s not like a Yugo vs Ferrari, Emilio, but it’s still a 98 # weakling compared to the .308 it ‘replaced’…sorta replaced….

But, maybe several thousand rounds I’ve fired and chronographed and examined many when recovered were different than someone else’s (?)… I don’t need to look. I can recall still, so far…and have a 3 tour in Iraq Afghanistan son in law Marine and what daughters husband does not delight in shaking out the FIL….Long ago, bullet tumble in the round was common and troublesome and ultimately traced to and corrected by and directly related to the, at the time, 1 in 14 inch barrel twist rate which was way too slow for the bullet weight. I’ve shot old, old AR’s that actually delivered the bullet to target sideways at 100 yards, as easily seen on a paper target. Keyholing is a common term for it. It was NOT a desired thing. Penetration was iffy at best. And notoriously inaccurate as a result of said instability. Now you’ll find most common is a 1 in 7 on the service versions for 62 plus grain , and still a lot of 1 in 9 that were the most common for 55 grain. Penetration is a function of weight and design overcoming target resistance. I have seen both 55 and 62 grain drill little needle like holes right through a medium size feral hog skull side to side and also seen the same “tumble” which is go unstable and rotate off axis after encountering solid objects, like equipment carried on one-self or ribs/other bone. Perhaps this is what you refer to.

I have see larger caliber rounds hit one end and come out a foot away in another direction. Stuff happens when speed hits tissue. Humans and many beasts are mostly water and water does not compress.

BUT current “common” military rounds for such rifle types tend toward steel penetrator core type, or like it, to defeat body armor.

Anyway, I have no need to lie to you or anyone else about anything I know. No doubt some others disagree, so believe what you want. I certainly expect that, and, just don’t care. I can explain what I know to be factual, but it’s up to others to accept or understand.

Anyway, Emilio, hitting a vital target area is what makes a bullet “deadly”. Hit in head with .22 LR is worse than shoot off toe with .50 cal…

But, you know this, and just razzin’….

Shawn Kadlecek

Governments the world over have killed a lot more people with their guns than individual citizens have. I would like to keep my guns, thank you. The U.S. .government is no different.

Gary Miller

Bonds entire post is a lie. Many guns are built and used for target sports. More ammo by, a factor of a thousand, is fired at targets than something alive. More ammo is used to harvest wild game than killing people. More ammo is used to kill criminals, a benefit to society, than is used to kill an innocent person. FBI reports 2.1 million times a year an legally armed citizen defends them selves or others with a gun. None of the 4 or 5 million American guns ever decided to kill some one.99.5 % of all guns, including military weapons, ever made were ever used to kill. Anti gun activists (AKA CRIMINALS) kill more often than honestly armed citizens. Socialists and Democrats hate legally armed citizens because they kill 5.5 million criminals (AKA Democrat VOTERS) a year. A benefit to society that can't be matched by any ANTI GUN law. Some mentally sick people use guns to kill while others use knives, clubs, cars, fire or poison.

Emilio Nicolas

Your entire tirade is based on a lie. What you suggest is not and has never been a part of the national debate on guns.

George Croix

The problem with 'national debates' is included are people who don't have a clue what they are talking about. Just a bunch of talking points and fears. Which is why useful info and data gets covered up by wants and dreams, and, these days, hysteria and aggression...

That includes too many of our elected representatives.....and most of our citizens, or so it seems...

Emilio Nicolas

Another problem with national debates is that some people think they know it all and do not allow for other opinions. Thanks for making your own point!

George Croix

Emilio, you do know that posting in here IS being allowed to have your opinion, don’t you. There’s no Turn Emilio Off button.

Disagreeing with you is NOT silencing you.

Don Schlessinger

"The problem with 'national debates' is included are people who don't have a clue what they are talking about." As in 9 mils are high powered weapons that will tear a victims heart out of their body. Give me a break.

George Croix

Don, yesterday I heard a talking head, can’t remember name, lucky to remember mine (grin…) actually say that a hit from a “high caliber assault rifle” will, quote, “Tear the lungs right out of a body”….

Well…..I guess that’s the next iteration of my President and his “high caliber” 9mm….

Gary Miller

Correction. OOPS 400 or 500 million AMERICAN guns.

George Croix

pss: Forgot your last admonition....

"Be reasonable and consider limits on guns, who can possess them and on your own point of view."

We already have those first two, Emilio. And we also have limits on killing people. The limit there is zero. The Uvalde A hole LEGALLY purchased his guns . Had my 'extreme' position about actually say something when so many saw something, been utilized, he'd be in a psych ward and 21 people would be thankful....all it would have taken was a phone call or a few....

No cost for that....

Charles Douglas

Mr. Croix> [thumbup][thumbup][thumbup] Good job!

domenico nuckols

The Texas GOP is button paid for by the NRA. I don’t anticipate any gun laws being changed unless we vote out the GOP. The Texas government does not care about little children all I care about is money in their pocket

Carlos Ponce

NRA contributes to both sides, mostly Republican but the teacher's unions give more to Democrats.

George Croix

So, what we need are REAL gun laws in Texas that the GOP can’t manipulate, by voting them out, then instituting vastly stricter ones in NY, CHI, AND LA and such that the blue team have.

Attaboy……..

domenico nuckols

Carlos, it’s always the other guys did it too. It is time the enter country take responsibility for gun control. Three times I had to recover remains for an assault weapon shooting. It’s a sight I wish I never saw and never forget. Show what the results of an assault weapons shooting does, a lot of people would change their minds.

Carlos Ponce

It's not the guns, it's mental health.

It's not the guns, it's the drugs people take.

If it WERE the guns, everyone who possesses one would turn into a killer or mass murderer.

Look for the ROOT CAUSES behind the killings. IT'S NOT GUNS!!!!

domenico nuckols

Carlos> If it’s mental health why, did your governor send 200+ million dollars of mental health money to the border wall?

Carlos Ponce

Gee, $200+ MILLION out of Texas DHHSC budget of $50,886,590,383 (rounds to $51 BILLION. But the money was taken out in two phases:

$117,347,952 in Fiscal Year 2021 and $93,382,076 in Fiscal Year 2022. Let's see.... that's about 4% of the budgeted $51 BILLION.

https://www.hhs.texas.gov/sites/default/files/documents/annual-federal-funds-report-fy2021.pdf

https://gov.texas.gov/uploads/files/press/O-LeadershipDisasterApproval202204290544.pdf

Compare

$200,000,000+ out of

$51,000,000,000

Gov. Abbott met with agency heads to see how much they could SPARE. DHHSC said about 4%.

George Croix

I’m still wondering why Gov. Ann Richards emptied the mental institutions.

I agree whole heartedly that we need to do a LOT better with the problem, but I wonder how it becomes more than just an exercise in futility unless we have the legal authority to confine the dangerous cases against their will. And how to handle THAT can of worms. Right now we are turning known criminals loose without bail in too many places, so it may be hard to get the same people on board with confining potential trouble until cleared for safe release.

Worth a try, and reflects action on an actual source issue.

Carlos Ponce

Since Demonico is SOOOOO concerned about the wall...

"Biden Spending $3 Million Per Day to Not Build Border Wall -Report finds as much as $2 Billion wasted since inauguration"

https://cis.org/Law/Biden-Spending-3-Million-Day-Not-Build-Border-Wall

"Biden Administration Pays $3 Million Every Day To Not Build The Border Wall"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-administration-pays-dollar3-million-every-day-to-not-build-the-border-wall/ar-AAMpwNd

"Exclusive–[Sen.] Joni Ernst: Joe Biden Paying Contractors $3M Every Day to Not Build Border Wall"

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/05/26/exclusive-joni-ernst-joe-biden-paying-contractors-3m-every-day-not-build-border-wall/

Ted Gillis

The 21 victims in Uvalde would still be alive today had the legal age to buy a rifle had been 21. Oh sure he could have gone somewhere and bought them illegally, but where may I ask? Are there many illegal gun dealers in Uvalde that this kid could have connected with? Possibly, but unlikely. Heck the kid bought these weapons from a restaurant/gun retailer know by just about everyone in town. Even Walmart and other large retailers do not sell these types of guns. So the chances that this Ramos teenager could have found an illegal gun dealer In Uvalde that would be willing to sell to him is very slim.

All of these people could still be alive if the federal law to buy long guns was 21.

Nobody in that stupid press conference the state had was willing to say that.

Single doors, mental health, forgetful teachers is about all they could offer up.

Carlos Ponce

"The 21 victims in Uvalde would still be alive today had the legal age to buy a rifle had been 21."

You don't know that, Ted. Prior to turning 18 he was trying to get another of age to purchase one for him, his sister, Marisabelle Ramos, 21, US Navy stationed in San Diego. Police revealed on Friday that the gunman asked his sister to help him buy a gun before his 18th birthday and that she 'flatly refused'. For the amount of money he had, someone could have bought one for him but his 18th came up making it unnecessary.

"All of these people could still be alive if the federal law to buy long guns was 21."

Ted, Ted Ted! KEEP UP! The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled California’s ban on the sale of semiautomatic weapons to adults under 21 is unconstitutional on May 11, 2022.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/05/11/20-56174.pdf

domenico nuckols

Carlos> There has been ZERO public mental health beds in Galveston County since Ike. That 200+ million dollars should have been spent what the legislature ear marked it for. Not some political folly. Stop trying to BS your way around it.

Emilio Nicolas

Carlos compares money earmarked for mental health to the whole HHS budget rather than what was previously budgeted for mental health. Disingenuous!

Carlos Ponce

"Carlos compares money earmarked for mental health to the whole HHS budget rather than what was previously budgeted for mental health." No I did not.

Carlos Ponce

The DHHSC has $51 Billion allocated. ONLY 4% of that was diverted to the wall.

No beds?

Check out the Gulf Coast Center: "Your mental health is as important as your physical health. As the mental health authority for Galveston and Brazoria counties, Gulf Coast Center can help if you are having a mental health crisis now or need ongoing support to help you manage an ongoing mental illness.

Our mental health services include a 24-hour crisis hotline, emergency and stabilization services, inpatient and outpatient psychiatric care, counseling, and skills and education training. We serve adults, children, and adolescents.

We coordinate patient care activities with other partner community agencies in order to provide well-rounded care. Our goal is to know and understand the needs and preferences of those we serve. Communicating and providing care at the right time and with the right partners helps increase safe, proper, and effective care. Services provided are tailored to each person’s needs."

https://gulfcoastcenter.org/mentalhealth/

domenico nuckols

The Gulf Coast Center does not have any inpatient beds of their own. They coordinate with other providers. I went to the meeting today about mental health on the front page of the paper. The only inpatient beds are in Houston. UTMB shut down its inpatient services after Ike. Mainland Center does not have a public mental health bed.

domenico nuckols

Calos is attempting to change the narrative. Your Governor in his attempt to get re-elected going to solve the mental health problem by giving back the money he stole from the mental health department.

Carlos Ponce

Inane.

David Hardee

Mr. Bond, Your 'Guns don’t kill people' is a lie

" article was so popular it deserves a sequel.

Could you give us the same evaluation on the consideration BULLETS should be given when they are loaded and also when they are not loaded.

To all that are enjoying bantering on this issue, certainly you know that what is being said has been said each and every time a similar evnt happened. What is being said can be summarized into 2 words "fix it". Then there are the sub sets - fix guns, and or fix people, and or write a law, and or (the most ludicrous and the favorite of the most prolific credentialed group in government) MAKE THE GUN MANUFACTURER LIABLE FOR ANY MISUSE. That liability will give the ambulance chasers another low fruit opportunity to ravage the public with their scripted smoke blowing up the exhaust portal of the general publics mentally dumb. If you have ever passed the words "never happen again" out of your verbal portal you are incapable of being distinguished with having any "common sense" - and consequently you are a true (birds of a feather) Biden devotee. Biden's devotee's have their Ignorance as their bliss and the rest of us regret free speech does not have a blabber filter.

Good ole USA where life, liberty and happiness are paid for by a few CITIZENS, enjoyed by EVERYONE and being gobble up by a steady stream of invaders that are illiterates to language and traditional culture. Ross Perot said "that sucking sound across the border" when the stupid trade treaty was adopted that sent the jobs and money to south American countries. We did not realize that it would eventually suck, - all the cowards that will not suffer hardships and work to make their homeland successful - into the USA hordes to devoir the USA largesse - like locus in a wheat field.

If you don't take out the garbage it builds up, stinks, causes sickness, and will eventually kill. The USA has for 62 year been tittering into a garbage pit. Biden's election is the USA Nero - biden fiddles while the country is igniting with fires of disruption and trauma.

GBA, please!

Charles Douglas

Mr. Hardee> You are on point as usual, and telling it like it is!!!!! Joe Biden wants to kill the first & second amendments to the Constitution! He wants to ban guns in America for law abiding citizens while their families are subject to be attacked or confronted by armed criminals possessing SMUGGLED IN semi-automatic pistols and rifles gotten from gun smugglers crossing uninhibited across our Southern Border! Joe Biden is in perpetual denial, you can look at his face and tell he is in over his head! I won't even bring up Kamala Harris! THIS IS WHO THE WOKE GAVE AMERICA TO LEAD US!?

Criminals are taking over, they walk out of court free to go back, to a life of crime because of Liberal feeble attempts at manipulating voting of minorities! Food, Insurance, mortgages, rent, clothes, gasoline are off the charts! Inflation moving toward a fifty year high now. Our military is being watered down with CRT & Racial division! Police are vilified, excoriated and defunded! Slow Joe's answer to all this is to lay blame on something or somebody else! Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are without a doubt the two worst, incompetent, deceptive, Leaders who ever held public office anywhere! Everything about them are fake, even the DC Oval Office!

domenico nuckols

Carlos > I was wrong, GCC has a new unit for observation. Not inpatient hospital beds in the county.

Carlos Ponce

Read today's article.

"The Gulf Coast Center already operates a facility in Texas City where people can stay for up to 14 days."

So where do they stay? On the floor?

domenico nuckols

Carlos> Take the bait and go fishing.

Carlos Ponce

So where do they stay? On the floor?

Pete Nanos

You are all the proof we need that mental health is a real issue.

David Hardee

Not directly associated to the details in this thread but a conclusion that is drawn from the composite of all the media (fake and other) sources it indicates the disgusting performance of the progressive liberals promoted Biden presidency and his apointed deviate minions have begun a cannibalisms among themselves. At the top of the food chain the canabals are nipping the away what little false credibility the media had created on his old demented carcass. It is sad to see a this callous sacrifice of their puppet but was to be expected as the history of these power thirsty had demonstrated - with their any means necessary for the preservation of the Democratic Party elites - the Clinton's trail of sacrificial corpuses..

Even the lgbtq crested networks (Anderson, Lemon, Shepperd Smith, Maddow and cohorts) are tucking in their napkins for feast on stammering Joe. Surly Mamma Buttigieg and transvestite Rachel Levine, plus the the 100 Days mark of Joe Biden’s presidency – over 200 known LGBTQ people have been appointed to his administration, the most in history at this point in any administration are reflecting on the sauces the will be

Ed Buckner

David Hardee doesn't hide his mindless bigotry--you gotta say that for him.

David Hardee

Hello ED! This comment says in exceptionally few words for the Ed we all know as the master debater. Consequently Ed must have had to struggle to condense his true intent in this compact snide quip. I am going to be audacious and translate this quip into what stimulated your offering.

"doesn't hide" meant David says what he means, right? And that direct speech is interpreted by the reciever based on the knowledge the interpreter has of the sender's history of statements on the similar issue, right? Thanks Ed for ordaining me as a straight (no pun) shooter.

"mindless" Ed says, which means - acting or done without justification or concern for the consequences. - my offering contains the rational associations and the effects of these lgbtq media/network personnel are currently perpetrating on their once brethern president. And attached "bigotry" which is one of the many bastardize conceptional words that the minority activist use to reflect race or phobia on any published offering. A discriminating mind is not mindless and the disclination(s) are not phobia or psychosis originated if supported by relative evidence.

Ergo, my offering has sufficient veracity that a unbiased interpreter can argue against . And only a mindless or non-critical thinker would make a quip like Ed's about. I have presented the Master De-baiter with an opportunity. right?

Ed Buckner

Mr Hardee need not apply for a job as translator--he's useless at it. His bigotry spoke for itself, so need to wax on.

He'd pass easily for a kindergartner, by his own lights, stooping to name calling.

Pete Nanos

Mr. Ed. To answer your "serious" question on opposing laws. No I don't oppose laws, but if we can't even enforce the laws we already have another law will only make people like you "feel" better. How many of these incidents have happened after all the warning signs were there and were ignored by family, teachers, the FBI and others? Time to take a different approach. Enough with the laws and blaming the guns. Blame the criminals and start getting them off the street, blame the mentally ill and get them off the street, go back to stop and frisk or other measures that were effective but that liberals felt were too intrusive. Just enforce the laws we already have and follow up when all the signs and evidence is in front of your face. Does that ensure that nothing will ever happen again? No, but it would be several steps ahead of what we're doing now.

David Hardee

Thanks for your comment. Yours, Mr. Nanos is the simplest and most comprehensive, summarization for the immediate action to be taken. While the majority is revisiting all the similar events trying to extract a "never happen again", which is never to be found, solution, you have made it certain that by only fulfilling precisely the already established remedies a most effective result will be had, ASAP.

The litany of those laws/regulations that are already enforceable and were effective but then fell victim to the liberal permissive hyperbole that they were DISCRIMINATIONS against minority(s).

The severe execution of laws and regulations on the culprits, including the fact, as always, there will be incidents of inappropriate executions, is being propagandized and projected as racism has diluted and or cause abandonment of effective laws/regulations. The most severe results from the propaganda of racism is claiming that a conspiracy of systemic corruption exists in the entire police and justice system.

Consequently, the proverbial "throwing the baby out with the bath water" has convoluted society, police, D.A.'s and laws and regulation making a consensus to take your, (Nanos), well described solution, beyond capability. The liberal’s agenda is to have a tiered system with mitigation for the culprits of certain characteristics. That permissive tiered system is a non-system and is true discrimination Shame on us for allowing the progressive liberal corruptions.

Ed Buckner

Mr. Nanos's solution: oh, let's not do anything, since current laws are often not followed or enforced. Mr. Hardee's solution: CAPITALIZE EVERYTHING!

Ed Buckner

...or maybe just CAPITALIZE really, really important WORDS!

David Hardee

Woops - the incomplete posting happened accidentally - here is continuation -

they will be devoured with.

I wish them a quick and painless political demise.

Emilio Nicolas

Whether insane or a new subspecies, get help! You should visit a psychiatrist and a veterinarian, just to cover all bases.

David Hardee

Your quip sarcastic offering on this and all the threads you clutter never have any other than a regurgitation of a incomplete, incomprehensible thought. If you have an argument to any or all that I stated don't be afraid to reveal with a credible statement you preferences or your rejections to the specifics or the general context you interpreted from my comment.

You deny that Biden is recently being devoured by the once supportive media? That fact I called cannibalism because the media is now eating what was it previously considered it's baby. True?

Are you ignorant of the density of the lgbt that proliferate the media - who I identified for you edification?

Throw me anothe morsel from your delusions and I will respond with some more illustrations of the deficiencies of your obvious infected Psyche, gladly!

domenico nuckols

dhardee, I believe you don’t like LGBTQ+ people!

Emilio Nicolas

You really think there is room for "argument" with someone that is constantly dogmatic, bigoted, hateful and can't tell the difference between stupid and not? I disagree.

David Hardee

Emilio, if you have settled you mind in the lowest level of discourse (kindergaten name calling) enjoy yourself. I sufficiently disposed of you with the previous reply. No further reply is required.

David Hardee

Come to point, Ed. Is a presentation pointing out mathematic inordinate density of a representation in a specific collective a: 1. proof of abnormal, 2. defying the law of probability, 3. exposing a phenomenal result. I.e. there is a statistical paradox exists - when a phenomenon in probability and statistics in which a trend appears in a group - as is the case when the lgbtq group is overly prolific in the CNN, MSNBC, and also in Biden cabinet/appointments. One does not not have to be a professional statistician to recognize that phenomenon.

The same phenomenon exists when competence and or qualifications are the elements used for probability and statistical evaluation. Is stating that conclusion also bigotry?

One of your like mindless cohorts said "dhardee does not like lgbtq" - When I make a offering to a thread the activity is the issue and those I identify are proponents - activist - or proselytizer.

Ed Buckner

Ah, Mr. Kindergartner Hardee wants me to come to point, to engage in actual argument and analysis. And i would--but only if he forswore childish bits like this: "Even the lgbtq crested networks (Anderson, Lemon, Shepperd Smith, Maddow and cohorts) are tucking in their napkins for feast on stammering Joe. Surly Mamma Buttigieg..." Shall I think up a "clever" insulting variation of "David Hardee" or ...?

David Hardee

Mr. Buckner distracted from the opportunity to embrace on the POINTS I presented for him to dispute. Instead he was enthralled with this sentence - : "Even the lgbtq crested networks (Anderson, Lemon, Shepperd Smith, Maddow and cohorts) are tucking in their napkins for feast on stammering Joe. Surly Mamma Buttigieg..." - which he declare as KINDERGARTEN/CHILDISH. Admited, this sentence is not in my usual direct message style. That sentence was purposely embellished to make it more attractively emphatic. And obviously no kindergartener could create such a sentence. It appears that sentence was successful as intended since ED - an aficionado and prolific orator/publisher - found it startling. Ed, what about the context of the sentence - does it convey the truth that Biden - once the darling - is now being portrayed as a detriment - by the overly lgbt represent media. It is getting to be tiresome to have to dissect all the context so that your ilk can absorb the obvious. That inability of the receiver to conceive the thought pattern being transmitted is astounding. Hopefully my effort in breaking down the sentence context with the simplistic of - subject (Biden) verb (is) adverb or subordinating conjunction (no loner) object (darling) prepositional phrase (of the overly lgbtq represented media). Got it, now, ED.

Ed Buckner

Oh, my. Mr Dimwit Hardily, extremely old though he is, wants me to engage. He thinks calling out Biden's stammering and giving Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg an insulting nickname is engaging, so I'll do my best to reply in kind. (Next, I'll make fun of the old guy's malapropisms and typos--good idea?)

Carlos Ponce

I happened to be channel scanning my radio today and came across one of the Liberal favorites NPR. The segments were apparently made when the May 18, 2018 Memorial was dedicated. Several students were interviewed. She tried to prod a student into saying he wanted gun control but the Santa Fe student didn't budge, "It's not about the guns," was his reply. She then told us a few students did say that gun control was needed but produced no confirming audio.

"It's not about the guns."

Emilio Nicolas

I'm impressed! You just discovered the basis of journalism: the story showed an opposing point of view. Congratulations! Of course, one opinion doesn't mean everything fits your narrative ... or does it?

Carlos Ponce

The same thing happened when CNN interviewed the SFHS Baseball team who had their playoff game delayed in May 2018. Are you calling for GUN CONTROL? No ma'am. It's not about the guns.

We have a Liberal press trying to force their narrative.

Emilio Nicolas

No Carlos, not necessarily. You are demonstrating "liberal press" shows another point of view, but then "presses its narrative". Do you not see the same thing on the "conservative" press? Or, are you going to blindly defend the hypocrisy?

Carlos Ponce

The CNN interview has been pulled but MSNBC had a similar take. MSNBC pulled their video.

"MSNBC reporter, Mariana ATENCIO: You think about Parkland. It happened in February. There’s been a national debate about gun safety and gun reform. What do you guys think should be done?

B: It’s just kind of hard to control some of this stuff. I just say you got to be kind to others. Because they could, you say one thing to one kid, and that could set it off. Atencio tried to get them to become gun control advocates one final time, suggesting that they have a 'responsibility' to become gun control advocates like their counterparts in Parkland: 'We saw the teens in Parkland really become the voices of the movement for gun reform across the country. Now your voices have become all important. How do you feel about that responsibility on your shoulders right now, Trenton?'

Once again, Atencio did not likely get the answer she had hoped for. B responded to her question by saying 'It’s just kind of, you know, what it is. You know, it’s sad that it happens everywhere but, you know, you just kind of have to go through it'.”

https://clashdaily.com/2018/05/watch-liberal-hack-tries-to-get-an-anti-gun-blurb-from-santa-fe-hs-kids-epic-failure/

Emilio Nicolas

I got your point the first time Carlos. Apparently you didn’t get mine.

Ed Buckner

In the unlikely event that anyone wants an actual example of effective and appropriate mocking of someone by screwing up his name--in this case of George Lincoln Rockwell--just ask.

Pete Nanos

Responding to your reference that I say "just do nothing " where it pertains to new laws proves how you just put things out that are not designed to advance any dialogue when you know full well what my response was. You're a political hack at best and a jackass most likely. You get on here and troll with the intent to seem somehow relevant. I gave you some slack the first time you pulled one of your stunts, but you can forget any civility on my part going forward. I'll call you out for the pseudo intellectual horses rear you really are. You're in the right state now and maybe you can gain an audience there. We're pretty happy you're no longer here.

David Hardee

Amen!

Ed Buckner

Mr. Nanos, it's telling that you, who apparently don't grasp even the most basic standards of civility ("Mr. Ed"?) think calling someone who disagrees with you a "pseudo intellectual horses rear" is clever or meaningful. But it wasn't even when you were back in junior high. You're no more entitled to speak for the people in Galveston County than I am to speak for Georgians. If you'd like dialogue on the issues--any of them--you'd do well to grow up first.

George Croix

“Kindergartner Hardee”

“Dimwit Hardly”

I’m confused…..

chuckle

Ed Buckner

Ah, Mr Croix, if my name-calling of David Hardee were without context, I'd be embarrassed and ashamed to have engaged in such childishness. Same with mocking his advanced age. I just wanted to let him see what mocking someone's stammering or making up some insulting nickname for a US cabinet level secretary might feel like--to, in short, chide him for being childish instead of making analytical points. (I'd be unlikely to agree with him even if he kept it on an adult level, but I'd like it better.) Now, would you like me to provide you with several links and footnotes to back up what I'm saying? [crying][innocent]

George Croix

No need, Ed.

You’re response is self-explanatory…..

Thanks

😉

Ed Buckner

https://nickkristof.substack.com/p/how-to-speak-to-gun-enthusiasts?

Emilio Nicolas

Excellent article. Unfortunately, it is far to reasonable for this thread. Unlike the vast majority of gun owners, some others cannot break from the "all or nothing" perspective for fear of being banished from the peer group.

Ed Buckner

POVs and Guns

By Ed Buckner 2022.06.05

I’ve seen all or most of this before, but I can’t pin down where. I claim no great credit, and I’m fine with anyone else using it. The analogies implicit throughout are imperfect—analogies always are. But before anyone dismisses any parallel out of hand, please explain why you think a parallel cannot or doesn’t hold.

POVs is here used to mean privately owned vehicles—mostly automobiles, sedans, SUVs, etc., but also pickup trucks and the like. There are something over 200 million such POVs in the US.

Guns is here used to mean all sorts of firearms—mostly handguns and pistols, etc., but also rifles, shotguns, and the like. There are something over 390 million such privately owned firearms in the US.

1. Are most apparently used for peaceful, practical purposes by responsible owners?

a. POVs—yes

b. Guns—yes

2. Is an important reason for owning to protect key freedoms, according to owners?

a. POVs—yes

b. Guns—yes

3. Is there any real chance that national or local governments will attempt to confiscate these?

a. POVs—no; no serious information suggesting any government might try; no chance any such effort would succeed if efforts were undertaken

b. Guns—no; no serious information suggesting any government might try; no chance any such effort would succeed if efforts were undertaken

4. Are there limits on what can be owned now?

a. POVs—not many; probably a POV that could not be kept below 100 mph or that had no brakes, etc., would not be allowed

b. Guns—not many; private ownership of a rocket-propelled grenade or a tommy gun, etc., prohibited

5. Are these dangerous?

a. POVs—absolutely, especially if misused (driven too fast, driven while impaired, etc.). About 38,000 Americans die from POVs each year.

b. Guns—absolutely, especially if misused. About 45,000 Americans die from guns—mostly from handguns—each year. A majority of the deaths are suicides.

6. Are owners/users generally registered and required to be licensed?

a. POVs—yes.

b. Guns—no.

7. Are owners/users generally required to carry liability insurance on these?

a. POVs—yes, in every jurisdiction.

b. Guns—varies greatly by jurisdiction, but mostly not.

8. Are there laws against misuse?

a. POVs—yes; there are fines and even imprisonment imposed for misuse. These vary greatly, from parking tickets to heavy penalties for driving drunk or driving recklessly at 85 mph in a school zone during school hours.

b. Guns—yes; there are fines and even imprisonment imposed for misuse. These vary greatly, from requiring locked gun cabinets for storage to enhanced criminal penalties for use of a firearm in the commission of another crime (robbery, etc.)

9. Is misuse always successfully prevented by laws against it?

a. POVs—no. People park illegally, speed, sometimes drive drunk, sometimes speed in a school zone, etc. But laws help. Sometimes the laws help by regulating what non-owners can do: it’s illegal to sell a stolen car or to fraudulently claim a vehicle one is selling meets safety standards when it doesn’t, etc.

b. Guns—no. People shoot up traffic signs, hunt without a license, soup up their guns illegally, etc. But laws help. Sometimes the laws help by regulating what non-owners can do: it’s illegal to sell a gun to a 12-year-old, to pretend you’ve done a required background check, etc.

10. Does the US Constitution, as amended, prohibit regulating these?

a. POVs—no

b. Guns—arguably limits such regulation, despite the Second Amendment’s reference to a “well-regulated militia.”

11. Is there an obvious, single, comprehensive, solution to reducing the dangers from these through legislation?

a. POVs—No. Many, many regulations are in place, having been added at different government levels over decades—and these have in fact greatly reduced the carnage. More can no doubt be done.

b. Guns—No. Few regulations are in place, having been added at different government levels over decades—and these few have in fact seemed to reduce the carnage somewhat. More can no doubt be done.

12. Should we give up trying to regulate these?

a. POVs—surely not. Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good.

b. Guns—surely not. Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good.

George Croix

An Indiana woman was arrested after allegedly following her boyfriend to a bar, accusing him of cheating on her and repeatedly running him over, killing him.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/woman-tracks-boyfriend-airtags-kills

A Harris County, Texas woman fatally shot a suspected stalker after he allegedly found her new home address and kicked in her front door, according to investigators.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/texas-woman-shoots-suspected-stalker-police

Ed Buckner

Mr. Croix, I have no doubt that you have given us two accurate stories, one of using an auto as a weapon (in Indiana) and one, locally, of a woman using a gun in self defense. What conclusions do you think these lead to?

George Croix

That, under any circumstance, any thing, in this case these two things, can be used for good and bad.

I don't think it serves reality for any of us to only look one way at an intersection.

Ed Buckner

Of course these two things can be used or misused (as noted in my long post above). Why do you think that even needs saying? Of course we should not look only one way at an intersection--or rely on simplistic solutions for complex matters. But we also should be open to considering some as yet untried solutions.

George Croix

Because you asked, Ed.

"But we also should be open to considering some as yet untried solutions."

Of course we should.

"Why do you think that even needs saying?".....

grin

Solutions are great if they have a chance to work and not just pursue the elusive One Size Fits All. I haven't heard anyone say they are against doing something different that might be a solution, but may have missed that. Banning guns has never yet been a solution, except for politicians to fund raise. Ask the DOJ how well the "assault weapons ban" worked. They produced a report that must have had them gnashing their teeth to admit that it was statistically not worth renewing....

When anyone is willing to break existing law, its an exercise in futility to do the same things over again, and proves A. Einstein's definition right.

Question to anyone: Where do we have a true hardened school that we can point to, and say that doing THAT has not worked, there? Nowhere that I know of.

The 'do something' bunch usually stops short of cost and inconvenience to them, and the politicians would rather fund raise off tragedy while using our federal income taxes to keep the status quo working in their favors.

Having failed at the last ban, lets avoid the road to proving a definition right, and try the first unused solution of retrofitting existing schools to preclude as much as possible unwanted entry by anyone or with anything. Congress is always yammering about 'do it for our children'....while the cameras roll......

Ed Buckner

Mr Croix, is asserting something all it takes to make it true? Or is actual evidence needed? There may well be some ambiguity about how successful the lat ban on assault weapons was, but alas, i won't just take your words for it. And there is at least some evidence to the contrary: https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2021/03/assault-weapon-ban-significantly-reduces-mass-shooting/ What do you think of the move to establish "red flag" laws--nationally or in Texas? Of expanding/enhancing universal background checks before any sale of a firearm?

George Croix

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/08/bill-clintons-claim-that-assault-weapons-ban-led-big-drop-mass-shooting-deaths/

There. It’s WAPO sourced, and the link direct to the DOJ is in about the third paragraph, give or take…. The article itself summarizes key points. There’s something in it for all…pro and con…

I’m gonna make a WAG and say the DOJ, for all their warts, is likely less self serving on this issue….

I asserted nothing about the findings, stating clearly the DOJ genesis. This is a glorified chat room, not a think tank…pretty boring if every conversation required “proof”, especially since it’s so easy for all of us to find, well, friendly sources.

Red flag laws?

Mixed feelings. In theory, useful tool. In practice, often false sense of security, as it’s useless unless people who know of a problem ‘wave the flag.

It also concerns me that it does away with due process….in America we’re supposed to be presumed innocent unless found guilty…but in this case I’m about like I am on the 1934 National Firearms Act and, at this point, think the greater good makes that tool worth having.

Background checks?

We HAD them for 60 years….they, too suffer from and are limited by not being any better than the data and reports put in. The Uvalde killer made a legal purchase, successful because nobody flagged what they new was trouble and nobody input his mental issues into the background check system. Best system fails if incomplete.

Expand them? Maybe make the one we have now more functional, as there are too many gaps between theoretical usefulness and actual. Repeating, the killer not only passed, but also lied on form 4473, a federal felony, by not checking the questions about drug use and mental treatment. It was moot because he killed himself.

Background check ALL transactions? No. For one thing, it’s unenforceable, absent a Police State, and, even then. For another, to me, we’re in greater danger from the nutty policies releasing criminals on no bail than from my granddaughter getting Grandpas hand-me-downs….

I think enforcing existing gun laws would do a lot more than creating new ones, especially repeats….prosecute…..don’t excuse….

I still say, harden the schools….

George Croix

Brain far…uh, fog….just noticed error

The Uvalde shooter lowlife was eventually shot dead by a CBP officer.

TheTulsa hospital killer shot himself…..

George Croix

Depending on which of many guesstimates one picks there are 80 to 100 million gun owners in this country. Let’s low ball at 80.

If one believes Pew Research, roughly 45000 gun related deaths in the USA and 54% of those were suicides. Let’s use all, though, because, imo, offing yourself is not a responsible act.

So we get 45 thousand dead by firearm out of 80 million at least gun owners (yes, many own more than one, but that would be figuring percent of killed per gun,and, it’s the people doing the killing).

That means that the percent of gun owners who kill their fellow man, INCLUDING suicides, is .056%. That’s a bit more than 1/2 of one percent.

It seems to me that pleas for more responsible gun ownership border on a quest for perfection, as what else can anyone name that has a 99.5% ratio of responsible use.

Maybe rather than yet again tackling that non problem, let’s focus on and severely punish…big time consequences…the actual problems….

Ed Buckner

Mr. Croix, I agree in part with you. I especially agree that the problem is NOT the vast majority of gun owners, beyond some blame for allowing their good names to be abused by the gun manufacturers and the NRA as they lobby against even reasonable changes in regulations. I'm not sure your "percent of gun owners" is accurately calculated (maybe), but I am sure that the percent who are themselves a threat to other law-abiding citizens or even to themselves is quite small. Some of my nearest and dearest are among them. And please let me add that your fact-based and generally non-insulting approach carries weight with me and, I think, with many others who do want some solutions considered even if we disagree with you. There are others, on this forum and elsewhere, who make reasonable discussion or changes nigh impossible--including, I regret to say, some on my side of the great divide on these matters. Name calling and rude insults are uncivil and counterproductive.

George Croix

I’m an NRA Endowment Member, Ed, before that a Life Member, before that an Annual Member.

I also consider myself Christian.

Am married.

Was according to one or two people, I think, a reasonably good operations supervisor and fire captain.

I have never fully agreed with everything ever tossed at my by any of those.

Ed Buckner

George Croix, [thumbup]

George Croix

The official Twitter account of House Democrats was pummeled by social media users after it called for action against all semi-automatic rifles.

"Semiautomatic rifles are weapons of war. Refusing to act and save lives in this moment is an immoral abandonment of your constitutional duty," House Democrats tweeted on Wednesday.

Well, there's a good demonstration of, at best, clueless turned into legislation, and, at worst, step 1 to those firearms that " they are never coming after"....the "lie".......

chuckle

Nobody could be that stupid to make such a blanket statement, so nefarious seems more descriptive than concerned.

Fortunately, it's just a showboat ticket that will not be punched...yet....

My two little Ruger 10/22 rifles can rest safe until the next assault from the far left......

"Never let a crisis go to waste".....

It should be unfair to largely create the genesis of a crisis then sling slogans and try to benefit from it.....

George Croix

Hopefully recuperation from my recent attempt to prove I could still lift the same weights that I could 50 years ago will allow me to get back to something more active and productive, but, until then, here's a little something for everybody.

I actually read it on Fox News, but sent the direct Q pole link so the USGS wouldn't get any false earthquake readings.

chuckle

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3848

,

Welcome to the discussion.

Real Names required. No pseudonyms or partial names allowed. Stand behind what you post.
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.

Thank you for reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.