NRA -are they Serious?!?

[Beavah 205]

Government taking our guns would not have stopped the the Sandy attack because guns will still be out there. If some mental case wants to take a large group of folks with him to eternal hell, he will find the weapon.

 

Yah, first off "government" is our fellow citizens settin' up reasonable rules and norms for behavior, eh? It's not some separate boogey man comin' to take things. When your fellow citizens believe too many people are behavin' foolishly or irresponsibly, then they enact restrictions. As they should. Da answer if yeh don't want too many restrictions is to do better education and set a higher standard of ethic within da gun using/manufacturing/selling community and be partners in helpin' people ensure responsibility. That was da opportunity the NRA failed to capitalize on. That's where they failed to honestly represent their constituents, because most of us firearm owners try to maintain a very high standard. Instead, they set themselves up as advocates for allowin' lack of responsibility, which leaves only imposing restrictions as an option to our fellow citizens.

 

I agree that someone who is part of a criminal enterprise like drug dealin' is goin' to be able to obtain firearms illegally if they want 'em.

 

Da evidence on mental health cases, though, is different. Folks sufferin' mental breakdowns choose tools that are convenient and that they're familiar with, eh? They don't have contacts in da criminal underground. In almost all of these cases, they take firearms from relatives that were unsecured. Usually firearms that they are familiar with and that da relative liked to show off and talk about so it was on da fellow's mind. In da remainder, they buy legally themselves, most frequently pretty close in time to when they act. It seems perhaps we could do a better job of bein' responsible about such things.

 

Even mental cases don't go where there is armed resistance.

 

Oh, I don't know about that, eh? Seems like there's quite a few attacks on police stations, which is why they're increasingly fortified. Here's one from last month: http://www.policemag.com/channel/patrol/news/2012/11/12/veteran-dies-after-opening-fire-in-mich-police-hq.aspx

 

Da problem is that most of us don't really want everyone at da beach packing, eh? When it's a bunch of skilled and responsible hobbyists it's one thing. But when yeh get to the point of lots and lots of folks then yeh will have some less responsible ones by just da laws of statistics. On these forums about one person out of three has given voice to some stuff which to my mind shows poor judgment or poor assessment of real risk. If they overstate risk that makes 'em more likely to draw on others prematurely or inappropriately, or perhaps not teach kids responsibly. Of da folks who mentioned they carried 24/7, a part of me is curious as to whether they are all teetotalers, eh? Or do they occasionally put themselves in situations where their faculties are slightly impaired by a beer or two? Or more? How many themselves are experiencin' financial or family stress in their own lives?

 

Again, to avoid restrictions imposed by our fellow citizens who don't know as much, da firearms community has to be willing to acknowledge that while citizens in general have the right to be armed, there are plenty of citizens who should not be armed. Instead of startin' and endin' with a position of no restrictions, blame the media, da message from the start should be on da serious responsibility of gun ownership and use. They should be portrayin' themselves as da voice of responsible gun owners everywhere, and partners in solvin' this mess.

 

That's what's missing in da NRA's approach. Yeh begin with "as responsible gun owners, we are appalled" yeh continue with "as responsible gun owners, within our own community we will be doing the following by way of education and voluntary efforts", yeh follow up with "we will join with our fellow citizens to lend our expertise where we can, along with others from the mental health, education, and law enforcement communities." Yeh conclude with "we will fix this, together."

 

That was what was missing, eh? Responsibility. Respect for other professional groups. Partnership with da community.

 

All we got was rabid, disgusting, one-issue hyperventilated lobbying. That did not represent responsible gun owners well at all.

 

Beavah

 

[Eagle732 27]

"And having everyone walk around with a gun strapped to a hip holster, just means there will be more shootings during road rage, when parents get mad at their sons little league coaches, during arguments over favorite baseball or football teams at a bar also at a bar you can have that arguement over who goes home with the girl shootouts."

 

Do realize that your state of New Hampshire is a Right to Carry, Shall Issue CCW state? That means anyone without a criminal record can go into a police station, fill out some forms, have a background check and get a permit to carry a gun in most public places. According to you people in your state should be killing each other left and right! Do you realize that for 2011 New Hampshire had a murder rate of 1.3 per 100,000 and Maryland had a rate of 6.8! Of course don't let the facts get into the way of what makes you feel good.

 

Here in Maryland we do not have the right to CCW and I dare you to walk on any street at night in Baltimore. The only people carry concealed around here are the criminals. Remember our murder rate is 5 times what yours is and we can't defend ourselves!

 

According to you putting cops in schools is crazy, although I bet you agreed with it when Clinton introduced his COPS initiative that gave grants to local schools for police officers in 2000 after Columbine.

 

NRA: Cops in schools = BAD

Clinton: Cops in schools = GOOD

 

It's no wonder this country is going down hill fast.

The difference between you and me is I deal in facts and logic and you deal in emotions and feelings. Your way of thinking gets people killed.

(This message has been edited by Eagle732)

[moosetracker 132]

Sure I do. We could get as screwed up as Florida, is with their "Stand your ground" law where someone shoots some and says "I thought I saw ______" so they can use the SYG" and get off.. I hope not, but it could happen..

 

So far we haven't started to push that every citizen should be armed "Just in case". But, we might. It's there, it's not glorified.

 

Our state is getting more crime ridden. But, it is just slower in obtaining the crime of other states due to it's lack of concentrated population. Our biggest cities would be a sleepy town to other states. My town isn't even Mayberry, it doesn't have a downtown area with a barber and a little shopping hub.. school, library, school, out of the town center.

 

Again, not my Utopia. Since our house will swing from Republican to Democrat at the beginning of the year, perhaps some of those laws will be revisited. I don't think we will ever be too tight, but with what is happening with the SYG in Florida, any reasonable state that enacted it should revisit that one. I have heard people can carry a gun into a bank as long as it is not concealed, that one seems a wee bit much also.. One can hope, for some common sense in the near future.(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

[Eagle732 27]

It's hard to have a discussion with someone when they are all over the place. Who's talking about Florida and Stand Your Ground? Do you even understand what that means or did you just see it on TV?

 

Facts vs Emotion

 

 

[moosetracker 132]

Sure, in Florida you can carry and if you think you are threatened you can shoot to kill, ask questions later.. Some states only allow you the right to stand your ground on your property, others (like florida) where ever you want, if you see someone you don't like then shoot to kill, make up something later about what you thought that made you feel threatened.

 

NH has a right to carry, NH has stand your Ground law, also in public places. It was passed even though Gov. Lynch vetoed it. So some Democrats had to vote for it also, but we were a Republican majority, these last 2 years but not a super majority. Hopefully with a Democratic majority and a Democratic Govenor and all the bad results from other states, it can be revisited.

 

I don't think talking about the right to Carry law and adding to it that not only do I know we have a Right to carry, but we have a right to Carry plus a right to shoot and kill anyone if we "think" it is necessary, with the "Stand your ground" law that we also have, is wandering. I am stating matter of factly that "YES" I do know what the NH laws are which pertain to gun laws. I also know how they came to be part of NH law. And "NO" I am not happy about those laws, and don't see them as being the reason why NH has less crimes.. In fact since we have had an uptick in crime in recent years, hmmm... Maybe it is not because our big cities are becomeing larger, perhaps it has to do with our gun laws..

[Brewmeister 132]

Eagle732, I wish we had more people that think like you.

 

Ah heck, I'd be happy if we had more people who think, period, rather than just assume, guess, and feel.

[Beavah 205]

Ah heck, I'd be happy if we had more people who think, period, rather than just assume, guess, and feel.

 

Yah, Brewmeister, me too, eh?

 

And perhaps more who would listen carefully, and begin with personal responsibility.

 

Despite da Texas study which showed some weak trends for CCW holders to be more likely to be convicted of violent offenses (which I suspect was demographic and not strongly tied to gun ownership), da best data shows that CCW and open carry folks are no less responsible than da general population and not a threat. Da average gun owner is reasonably responsible, and while I don't think they're well enough trained or experienced to be trusted shootin' it out with an invader in crowded school building, there's really not much risk to anybody other than themselves and their family havin' guns at home, or huntin' or whatnot. And that risk is comparable to da risk of gettin' careless with any machinery.

 

But we have had a fair number of disastrous incidents with folks who have become mentally unstable, through stress, financial pressure, or mental health condition. We've also had a fair number of disastrous incidents with young people gettin' a hold of family firearms when in a teen funk or strugglin' with their own mental health issues.

 

Certainly, da most reasonable thing to look at in such cases is what social supports we have for folks who are stressed, or in financial trouble, or in need of mental health services. We should do better. And schools should continue to look at what about school structure and support lets some kids fall so badly through da cracks. It'd be nice to see a big push on both fronts.

 

At the same time, it's also worth considerin' what can be done to limit access to strugglin' teens, stressed family men, and other folks with borderline mental disorders who think da world is comin' to an end. While it doesn't solve da mental health problem for those folks, it removes some bad options or at least makes 'em harder when da folks are near their crisis point.

 

I reckon it's also worth bein' thoughtful about some kinds of things that are more along da lines of law enforcement or military stuff. Da closer gear gets to higher-capacity semi-auto and intended use gets to firing at humans, da stricter da requirements should be for training and recurrent certification.

 

What's probably not helpful is folks with no school experience proposin' solutions that da professional educators don't agree with, or teachers' unions proposing solutions that firearms experts know won't be helpful.

 

Beavah

 

[packsaddle 753]

"What's probably not helpful is folks with no school experience proposin' solutions that da professional educators don't agree with, or teachers' unions proposing solutions that firearms experts know won't be helpful."

 

I wholeheartedly agree. I and my students have many times discussed the VA Tech tragedy and this cockamamie idea always comes up: 'what if I (meaning yours truly) and some other faculty, perhaps students had guns' and some event like that happened?

 

The campus already has an armed police force with their own protocol and procedures should such events happen. We (students and faculty) also have received instructions on how to respond. The last thing the armed police force needs is to respond to a shooter only to encounter maybe a dozen or more un-uniformed persons with guns, scared, running around, hiding...maybe even firing at something!

The gun nuts seem to be completely wrapped up in their fantasies but these 'what ifs' that they seem to entertain in their world of illusion...are just that: fantasies. They are the LAST thing I'd want present on campus if some tragic event like VA Tech happened again. Good Grief!

 

And thankfully our administration (in a rare demonstration of rational thinking) agrees and has pledged to continue the present 'no guns' policy for this campus even if the state passes the idiotic legislation allowing armed faculty and students. Each campus will have the ability to have its own restrictions.

[scoutingagain 20]

This was posted in another forum I follow. Provides food for thought in the national debate about the role of firearms in the US.

 

Source

 

Department of Health Services, UCLA School of Public Health, Los Angeles, California 90095-1772, USA. erin.richardson@gmail.com

 

 

Abstract

 

BACKGROUND:

 

Violent death is a major public health problem in the United States and throughout the world.

 

METHODS:

 

A cross-sectional analysis of the World Health Organization Mortality Database analyzes homicides and suicides (both disaggregated as firearm related and non-firearm related) and unintentional and undetermined firearm deaths from 23 populous high-income Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development countries that provided data to the World Health Organization for 2003.

 

RESULTS:

 

The US homicide rates were 6.9 times higher than rates in the other high-income countries, driven by firearm homicide rates that were 19.5 times higher. For 15-year olds to 24-year olds, firearm homicide rates in the United States were 42.7 times higher than in the other countries. For US males, firearm homicide rates were 22.0 times higher, and for US females, firearm homicide rates were 11.4 times higher. The US firearm suicide rates were 5.8 times higher than in the other countries, though overall suicide rates were 30% lower. The US unintentional firearm deaths were 5.2 times higher than in the other countries. Among these 23 countries, 80% of all firearm deaths occurred in the United States, 86% of women killed by firearms were US women, and 87% of all children aged 0 to 14 killed by firearms were US children.

CONCLUSIONS:

 

The United States has far higher rates of firearm deaths-firearm homicides, firearm suicides, and unintentional firearm deaths compared with other high-income countries. The US overall suicide rate is not out of line with these countries, but the United States is an outlier in terms of our overall homicide rate.

 

 

SA

[Eagle732 27]

Yea, I can site studies showing the opposite.

 

"This is the first study to examine how felonious police deaths are affected by changes in waiting periods and laws that allow law-abiding citizens the right to carry concealed weapons for self-defense. Although some people oppose shall-issue laws because they believe the laws endanger the officers lives, there is no evidence for that belief. After controlling for an array of factors, including trends before and after the law went into effect, I show that states that enact concealed carry laws are less likely to have a felonious police death and more likely to have lower rates of felonious police deaths after the law is passed. This result is statistically significant in seven of the nine specifications, and the difference between the before and after trends is significant in over half the specifications. Although point estimates show that the same qualitative results are true for felonious police deaths due to hand- guns, the results are statistically significant in only about one-quarter of the specifications. Also, the before and after trends in the shall-issue variable are statistically different in about half of the specifications. Furthermore, those who believe allowing private citizens to carry concealed weapons will endanger the lives of law enforcement officials do not even have anecdotal evidence to support their position. To date, we have no examples of law- abiding citizens with concealed weapons permits assaulting police officers. In contrast, there is at least one example of such a citizen coming to the aid of an officer."

http://www.terry.uga.edu/~mustard/police.pdf

 

 

[Beavah 205]

Yah, but Eagle732, those two studies don't show da opposite at all, eh? They're measuring different things.

 

One is showing that the U.S. when compared to da rest of the world is an absolute disaster when it comes to accidental and intentional firearms deaths. That's true, eh? We're the least responsible, most dangerous nation in da world in this area, outside of active war zones.

 

Da second study shows small to negligible effects of one policy choice within da U.S. That's a different thing. It suggests over a short period of time that this small policy adjustment does not have any effect on law enforcement fatalities - a very small subset of da bigger issue above.

 

Two different things.

 

Beavah

[CalicoPenn 729]

Back to the NRA.

 

As part of this whole mess, Wayne LaPierre has called for a national mental health registry. At the same time, the NRA will be the first to cry bloody murder if a politician were to suggest a national gun registry.

 

Is it any wonder why, when faced with a school shooting in Connecticut last week, and a sniper attack on firefighters leading to 7 homes being destroyed on Christmas Eve, that the NRA is starting to look more and more irrelevant to the conversation?

[Basementdweller 608]

Now that's funny

[Basementdweller 608]

A guard in every school....

 

What about the innocence of a kindergartener??

 

Are we infringing on their freedom and naivety of youth by posting guards in every school????

 

 

I am entertained by none mentioning this.

 

 

[Eagle732 27]

The kids in my son's school really look up to DT (Deputy Tom), he might just be the only positive adult male role model some of the kids have (unless their in Scouts).