Page 1 of 2

HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 2nd, 2017, 12:21 pm
by PucPuggy
Yes. I am putting this subject -- mass shooting in Las Vegas -- right where it belongs: Politicks.

Don't give me that 2nd Amendment crap, because it doesn't fly. The shooter was hunting people. Ban all automatic weapons
and ammunition from private hands as well as all military weapons from private hands.

They are pushing to obliterate the strict silencer restrictions because they want to "protect the hearing of hunters." Use ear- plugs and wear those shooting-range ear protectors, for cryin' out loud. Sport/wildlife hunters don't need automatic weapons with silencers to shoot game.

No, I don't want to melt down every gun in the USA. I want the NRA and its members to be grateful for the abundant and reckless freedoms they have, and stop this silencer thing. Dead in its tracks. Just do it.

SECOND AMENDMENT

Posted: October 2nd, 2017, 4:03 pm
by mike
All I can say is, it's a good thing tsiya isn't alive to read that comment.

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 2nd, 2017, 7:29 pm
by scrutney
in a very real way, i'm with puc on this.
i support the 2nd amendment...but back in the founders day, they carried muskets.

having said that...silencers can be home made very easily...from... a bunch of different stuff (not giving out any instructions...there are enough idiots out there without me putting them wise)

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 2nd, 2017, 11:26 pm
by RichWhitey
This 66 yrs old retiree could certainly become the poster child for gun control.

He didn't have any silencers that i read about, that was one of the side discussions. He did have 10 or more firearms -- high power rifles, shotguns, hand guns.

Re: SECOND AMENDMENT

Posted: October 3rd, 2017, 8:37 am
by PucPuggy
mike wrote:
October 2nd, 2017, 4:03 pm
All I can say is, it's a good thing tsiya isn't alive to read that comment.
Yes. well, it was an on-going dialogue we never agreed upon. Same as the Civil War. I don't mean why it was fought, but what it was called in the South and how much he hated Yankees. I'm from CT originally. But Tsiya liked me! We had great conversations about photography and he always sent me pix.

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 3rd, 2017, 8:44 am
by PucPuggy
RichWhitey wrote:
October 2nd, 2017, 11:26 pm
This 66 yrs old retiree could certainly become the poster child for gun control.

He didn't have any silencers that i read about, that was one of the side discussions. He did have 10 or more firearms -- high power rifles, shotguns, hand guns.

Hey, RichWhitey! The Shooter had a personal arsenal in his hotel suite and at home. And at least hundreds of rounds as well, if not thousands. And bomb-making equipment.

I realize he did not have a silencer. I brought that in to show the degree of savageness and subhumanity the NRA will go to make its legions happy. In retrospect, I'm kinda shocked he didn't put a silencer on his weapons. Imagine that one.

I'm sure you know: Smoke from all his shooting triggered the smoke alarm. Can you imagine? Makes me retch.

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 3rd, 2017, 8:50 am
by PucPuggy
scrutney wrote:
October 2nd, 2017, 7:29 pm
in a very real way, i'm with puc on this.
i support the 2nd amendment...but back in the founders day, they carried muskets.

having said that...silencers can be home made very easily...from... a bunch of different stuff (not giving out any instructions...there are enough idiots out there without me putting them wise)
Agreed. Muskets and look at the era in which this nation was founded: war. What was positive in the 18th century doesn't track now.

Silencers. Why do they really need them? They DON'T. That they can be made simply is enough of an argument against them, IMO. What the NRA wishes to do is make them convenient. There has to be a point where this society says NO.

I want gun shows abolished. Too easy to circumvent what little "restrictions" gun-owners and new gun-owners face.

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 3rd, 2017, 1:15 pm
by PucPuggy
Guitarist Keeter in the NYTimes.

THIS is the time, the massacre, the event, THIS is the one that will change laws.

Nope.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/us/j ... oting.html

Fake news stories circulate after Las Vegas mass shooting

Posted: October 3rd, 2017, 1:24 pm
by mike
Of course,
I knew that this article couldn't be far behind:


Fake news stories circulate after Las Vegas mass shooting
By: Melissa Etehad

In the aftermath of the deadly shooting in Las Vegas, which has so far claimed the lives of at least 58 people, fake news stories and false information started circulating on social media.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-las-ve ... story.html

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 3rd, 2017, 3:06 pm
by PucPuggy
Have you been listening to FOX News? :roll:

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 3rd, 2017, 11:19 pm
by Coebul
Out of respect I will only say Bull Puc-ky. Give up some of your free speech rights, or another one.. Leave my gun rights alone. I have done nothing wrong

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 4th, 2017, 7:40 am
by bieramar
Opinions/facts prior to the Las Vegas massacre:

• 40% of U.S. residents live in homes with guns.

• 91% of Dems and 74% of GOP think gun violence is "big problem".
• 88% of Dems and 79% of GOP want background checks before gun show private sales.
• 85% of Dems and 55% of GOP want a Federal Tracking database.
• 81% of Dems and 79% of GOP want laws to prevent sales to mentally ill.
• 70% of Dems and 48% of GOP want to restore the previous ban on assault-style weapons.

Source: Pew Research

The last. "assault-style" stat is the most relevant to mass killings; and the results - as compared to the others - are indicative of the anti-government populist feelings* that are rampant today. The same populist feelings that elected Trump.

Other than a minute maniac fringe fearing the walkers, and a slightly larger group of narcistic thrill-seekers, those opposing restoring the assault-style weapon ban justify their opposition by the possibility of having to militia-style defend their homes & neighborhood if the government fails/corrupts, and anarchy reigns.

*[I'm a populist republican — as contrasted with being a crony Republican or crony Democrat — but I'm pro government. Government, i.e., governing the greedy and the lawbreakers, is the crown jewel of civilization, and absolutely necessary for our security, and for protection of our inalienable and civil rights].

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 4th, 2017, 4:34 pm
by PucPuggy
Coebul wrote:
October 3rd, 2017, 11:19 pm
Out of respect I will only say Bull Puc-ky. Give up some of your free speech rights, or another one.. Leave my gun rights alone. I have done nothing wrong
Hi, Coebul, I know you are responsible and conscientious. I have no doubt about that at all. But it is not you I worry about.

What I don't get is WHY some people think it necessary to have weapons that are made for the military, solely to kill PEOPLE. These weapons never should be in private/civilian hands. It's the NRA insanity and well-honed rhetoric forced on he people of this nation AND its lawmakers.

The 2nd is perverted, abused, and needs revision.

I fail to see how giving up free-speech rights is the same as gun control.

YOU will lose those rights, too. It would be amusing if the NRA lost its free speech.

Out of respect I will only say Coe-Bull.

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 4th, 2017, 4:38 pm
by PucPuggy
bieramar wrote:
October 4th, 2017, 7:40 am
Opinions/facts prior to the Las Vegas massacre:

• 40% of U.S. residents live in homes with guns.

• 91% of Dems and 74% of GOP think gun violence is "big problem".
• 88% of Dems and 79% of GOP want background checks before gun show private sales.
• 85% of Dems and 55% of GOP want a Federal Tracking database.
• 81% of Dems and 79% of GOP want laws to prevent sales to mentally ill.
70% of Dems and 48% of GOP want to restore the previous ban on assault-style weapons.

Source: Pew Research

The last. "assault-style" stat is the most relevant to mass killings; and the results - as compared to the others - are indicative of the anti-government populist feelings* that are rampant today. The same populist feelings that elected Trump.

Other than a minute maniac fringe fearing the walkers, and a slightly larger group of narcistic thrill-seekers, those opposing restoring the assault-style weapon ban justify their opposition by the possibility of having to militia-style defend their homes & neighborhood if the government fails/corrupts, and anarchy reigns.

*[I'm a populist republican — as contrasted with being a crony Republican or crony Democrat — but I'm pro government. Government, i.e., governing the greedy and the lawbreakers, is the crown jewel of civilization, and absolutely necessary for our security, and for protection of our inalienable and civil rights].

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 4th, 2017, 7:30 pm
by scrutney
puc wrote:
The 2nd is perverted, abused, and needs revision.
quite frankly, i don't have a dog in this fire fight.
while i support the right to keep and bear arms, i do so solely because it's in the bill'o (bill of rights)

i don't like guns.
but...many of my good friends (and my brother) do.
i don't get it.
but i'll never change anyone's opinion so i quit trying years ago.

change in tack for a moment but in my humble opinion, the right to K&B is very much like the abortion "issue".

i made the mistake last night of posting the dictionary definition of "murder" to a friend of a friend on facebook.
here's her quote:
"Maybe I'm too simplistic, but my position has always been that "abortion" is a sanitized word for murder. How can it be called anything else?"
my response?
murder is a legal term and your use of it lacked precision.

sorry if you don't like the dictionary.
now i'll not share my views on abortion.
my views on the subject are not relevant to my point.
and that point is...you are not going to convince anyone to change their views on abortion or the 2nd amendment.
all you'll accomplish is torrents of chin music, hurt feelings and circular logic.
so i quit wasting my time...

and the sanctimonious b*tch with whom i was discussing the DICTIONARY fer chrissake? her final response when i refused to tell her where i stood on righttolife/prochoice/murder...:
I am so sorry you have no compassion for Your fellow man. I hope you have someone to care for you at your end
needless to say, the dark pollyanna wouldn't budge an inch, on a word that she used incorrectly.
scotus has spoken.
take it up with them.

the constitution has spoken and the 2nd A
float an amendment and i'm on board with the several states decision.

i'm easy like that

and lastly in a post chock full of full blown scrutney-esque verbosity:
this rant/screed/harrangue is directed at no one in particular...not puc, not my brother...no one.

but i would like to invite bieramar (specifically) and anyone else so motivated "sound off"

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 4th, 2017, 10:06 pm
by bieramar
Thoughts at random.

I don't have any difficulty with the 2nd Amendment, nor do I think it is perverted, nor that it needs revision. Heller - the law of the land - goes into painstaking detail in distinguishing the difference between the 18th Century meaning of the English concept of infringement of rights and restriction of weapons. The assault-type weapon ban was fully in accord with the 2nd Amendment for the decade it was in force, and will remain constitutional if it again becomes law.

People who don't understand Heller are ignorant, by definition. Not stupid, not unintelligent, not moronic - they may have 160 IQs - but they don't know (are ignorant) of what the Decision means.
The reason for the ignorance - often called "invincible ignorance" - differs from person to person, mostly intertwined with beliefs, emotions, ego, and fear of insecurity.

Similarly I have no difficulty with abortion. Roe v Wade has been sliced and diced for years, and remains the law of the land. All the words and terms, e.g., fetus, child, kill, destroy, murder, etc. have legal definitions and common (non-legal) definitions.

People who oppose the 2nd Amendment and/or Roe v Wade can elect Members of Congress and enact legislation (including Amendments) to change them - if they want to discuss their druthers for change, I'm willing and hopefully able, to discuss also.

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 5th, 2017, 12:22 am
by Coebul
The 2nd is perverted, abused, and needs revision.
The only abuse is a democrat "Never Let A Good Crisis Go To Waste"~Rahm Emanuel
I fail to see how giving up free-speech rights is the same as gun control.
Bill of Rights
YOU will lose those rights, too. It would be amusing if the NRA lost its free speech.
I will fight for my rights
Out of respect I will only say Coe-Bull.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flatery!

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 5th, 2017, 2:51 pm
by mike
May I? I carry a firearm.

In my defense (?) I have been shooting since I was about 16-years-old. At 18-years-old, I was a deputy sheriff. We carried six-shot revolvers, most carried .357 magnum; I carried .38 caliber. I later purchased a 9-shot 9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Today I carry a 5-shot .38 special. It is for my personal protection and to protect the lives of others, only. It only has a 2" barrel, so it doesn't afford the accuracy, at a distance, required for hunting. But within 5-10 yards, it is lethal.

I always have and continue to shoot and qualify regularly and feel like that is one of the most important handgun safety measures.

I do not believe the 2nd amendment, under the most conservative interpretation, provides for the right for civilians to own and carry military-grade, high-power, fully-automatic assault weapons. I do not fear that I might need one in the future.

I am licensed to carry my handgun, even though there is no registration required for the handgun I carry. I am trained and qualified to carry a handgun for all the right reasons. I am not a threat to anyone, but in this crazy world I accept the fact that anyone could become a threat to me or my family. I am accepting my personal responsibility to protect myself safely.

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 5th, 2017, 6:00 pm
by PucPuggy
mike wrote:
October 5th, 2017, 2:51 pm
May I? I carry a firearm.

In my defense (?) I have been shooting since I was about 16-years-old. At 18-years-old, I was a deputy sheriff. We carried six-shot revolvers, most carried .357 magnum; I carried .38 caliber. I later purchased a 9-shot 9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Today I carry a 5-shot .38 special. It is for my personal protection and to protect the lives of others, only. It only has a 2" barrel, so it doesn't afford the accuracy, at a distance, required for hunting. But within 5-10 yards, it is lethal.

I always have and continue to shoot and qualify regularly and feel like that is one of the most important handgun safety measures.

I do not believe the 2nd amendment, under the most conservative interpretation, provides for the right for civilians to own and carry military-grade, high-power, fully-automatic assault weapons. I do not fear that I might need one in the future.

I am licensed to carry my handgun, even though there is no registration required for the handgun I carry. I am trained and qualified to carry a handgun for all the right reasons. I am not a threat to anyone, but in this crazy world I accept the fact that anyone could become a threat to me or my family. I am accepting my personal responsibility to protect myself safely.
Bingo.

It is not you or Coebul I worry about, Mike.

Military weapons and ammo should not be available to civilians. Those guns have ONE purpose: to kill people.

Re: HOW MANY MORE TIMES? LAS VEGAS MASSACRE

Posted: October 5th, 2017, 6:41 pm
by PucPuggy
Hi Scutney,
I read your post carefully. I wish to respond. This is not personal, but hitting some points of your discussion, which I found very thoughtful (as usual).

Abortion.

First, if one is unwilling or unable to accept that women's' health care INCLUDES productive health care, then YOU (not you, Scrutney, but "one") are ignorant. Those who believe this don't get that women have a right to do what they wish with their own bodies. No GOVERNMENT has the right to tell me what to do with my health care.

I just love the anti-government people completely disregard their own pleas/demands for less government, yet want to curtail health care for women. BULL SHIT.

Murder??! Preposterous. If I don't want that baby for ANY reason, it is MY right to decide whether to terminate or not. Don't you get that whether to have an abortion or not is a heart-wrenching decision. This choice is with a woman all her life, no matter the circumstances.

The United States is not a country where abortion is used routinely as birth control. THAT is a very big deal in our health care. Why will the government NOT pay for birth control or completely defund Planned Parenthood but okay coverage for Viagra et al. Planned Parenthood provides low-income women with reproductive health care: birth control, PAP smears, internal exams, breast exams, the whole lot. When this is denied, NO ONE WINS. As a student I relied upon Planned Parenthood because I could not afford a gynecologist. Thank God for Planned Parenthood.

The sanctimonious among you see women as brood mares. Women are individuals endowed with the same rights and privileges as men.

It is a wicked, condescending, domineering double standard. MEN have rights for ALL health care, including erectile disfunction, but women's' health care is decreased -- purposefully and incrementally -- by every Republican president and governor across the decades. Old White Guys take away our rights and you love it. Not all of you, but enough.

You wish to use the words "kill" and "murder." Utter nonsense. When the fetus is NOT VIABLE and cannot live outside the womb, then it cannot LIVE. Who are y'all trying to kid with that propaganda. If you think you know when life begins, alert scientists and ethicists everywhere. No one else makes that pronouncement.

Domination over women is O.V.E.R., despite the views of the pussy-grabbing hump in the White House (a desecration).

NEWS FLASH: We are NOT returning to the 1950s, when African Americans were enslaved body, mind, and spirit. Or when "the little woman" was dominated by her father, husband, sons, etc. We are sentient beings. WE control our bodies, NOT the government.

And if anyone wishes to discuss this with me, FORGET IT. I am as deeply entrenched in MY beliefs as you are in the 2nd amendment. (Funny thing, I support the 2nd, but with revisions. I don't think the anti-choice people can make anything near the same claim [tolerance].