Guns

Post Reply
User avatar
snowflakey
E's Moriarity

Post   » Wed Nov 04, 2015 8:30 am


Thank you for that. It is hard for people to be open about their personal abortion experiences, which is very sad. It sounds like you handled the entire experience in the best possible way for you. Of course, the problem with "staying out of the politics" of abortion is that there are plenty of people who do not and their goal is to end all abortions in all circumstances (except, often they find they or their family members choose to have them, but, of course, their situation is "different.")

It is sad. People don't usually brag about their root canals or their hernia surgery or whatever. But they also aren't ashamed of them. It should be the same for abortions.

In gun news, how do you love the guy in Colorado Springs who shot up a bunch of people on the street? A woman saw him out there with his gun and called 911. Who then told her that since CO is open carry, there was nothing to be done about it. Of course, until he shot and killed some people. Then they can dispatch police, ambulances and coroners.

<RAGE>

piggypie

Post   » Wed Nov 04, 2015 10:57 am


Thank you jac for sharing. It is a very personal decision for any woman to make.

I got pregnant in my teens and had to make a decision about what to do. My decision was not to terminate the pregnancy and then to decide whether to keep the baby or no.

I think as women it's our responsibility to speak for other women and push back against the law makers to ensure that every woman gets to make the decision that is right for her, without external pressures and red tape to wade through.

What does everyone think of the new bill trying to be passed that would require gun owners to carry liability insurance?

Erinspigs

Post   » Wed Nov 04, 2015 7:11 pm


Thank you Jaqqueline for sharing, it was brave of you to bring up those emotions again.

I don't know how I feel about making that decision and so many other major topics of the day but that added a a good perspective I'v neaver heard

User avatar
JaneDoe

Post   » Fri Nov 06, 2015 3:46 pm


Thank you for sharing this, Jacqueline. I know it wasn't easy.

Erinspigs

Post   » Thu Nov 12, 2015 10:21 am


Sardonic, I don't think I said the main reason for abortion is being raped. I only said that would be a reason I don't beleive there should be any "waiting period". CDC reports there are just under 300,000 rapes a year reported in US alone, which means many more than that occur. I think a lot of those probably do end in preganacy.

I still think a waiting period is wrong. If abortion is leagal, no one should have the right to tell you when you can have an abortion. If I agree with abortion or not is irrelevant. But the waiting perios IS a way anti abortion crowds are trying to get woman to not have abortions. "I'm ready today but oh wait now I have to go back and wait". People in poor areas don't have luxury of schdeules like others do. If they are ready today, 3 days from now they may not have anyone to look after kids they have, or able to get off from 1 of their 2 minimum wage jobs, or have the money then, or any number of reasons.

It brings an abortion moving into later term status which I do think is wrong, in some cases. A baby that could be delivered perfectly fine without assitance but instead has skull crushed shortly before birth is murder in my opinion is wrong.

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Fri Nov 13, 2015 10:28 am


Sardonic - I hope you didn't feel too "slapped down". I have a feeling there are big differences between The Netherlands & the US where abortions are concerned - laws, attitudes, etc.

User avatar
jacqueline

Post   » Fri Nov 13, 2015 10:53 am


Well, and beyond differences in culture and law, there are so many personal differences.

I've always felt that one of the nice things here is the ability to discuss/debate things without it becoming overly personal. After all, we only know each other as fellow "posters" (at least for the most art).

User avatar
Wheekers3

Post   » Fri Nov 13, 2015 5:53 pm


There are many more here, I am sure you are not alone. So many are unspoken agonising choices.

I was thinking a few days ago how miraculous it was to manage to dodge that "bullet". However my Sis was not so lucky. She got pregnant the very first time she had sex. I walked with her on that path, and I can assure critics that it was all we thought for those waiting days. Nothing like getting a gun or tatoo. It was sickening. I don't think many waiting periods for a gun felt that way.

Thanks for your honesty Jac, I know that will never be easy. I am also thankful for Plan B. I am curious how many of those tablets have been sold.

GPIG

Post   » Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:13 pm


With recent developments and the escalation of mass shootings and being pro-gun I would be lying if I said I haven't thought perhaps certain aspects of gun control might need to be looked at. Not sure what they are or how to correct but at least I’ve been thinking about it.

I've been at my computer all morning listening to left and right versions of talk radio with the topic being terrorism, mass killing/shootings, guns. I'm sure everyone else is hearing.

A solution I am hearing about 70% on the more conservative stations is that we need to arm more “good citizens” and even "deputize" some, like people back from military service. I can add from experience that is not a solution, it will not work. Arming people with the idea of protecting others with a 2 week public concealed carry class is insanity and will get many more people killed than by doing nothing even.

Combat is really F'd up and why so many people who experience it end up with psychological disorders. Most police are not even properly trained for gun fights. They are scared and just shoot, wrong person, right person doesn’t matter til the smoke clears. How many times have we seen that happen? When real bullets are flying, the noise is deafening, chaos is like nothing ever experienced. Any 2 week carry permit type course is absolutely useless; most regular military pistol training is useless. If you get to shoot first maybe you win, but how many people will be just shooting people who are wearing a burka or white gown - without experience you are scared shitless and can't do shit to help. It takes so much training for this to become normal where you can focus and think clearly.

If people want o exercise their right to second amendment, fine I’m all for them but they are not going to make others in society safer. I can’t believe people are actually buying onto that.

piggypie

Post   » Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:53 pm


I think one solution would be to restrict the amount of bullets the guns can hold.

Here in Canada the majority of weapons (and please understand my knowledge is wide but not deep) only hold 3 rounds. A shot gun has a plug in it so you are limited to how many shells are in it.
Handguns may be the exception but then again handguns are much more difficult to own here in Canada. If you are not police or military you must keep your handgun in a locked case and you are only allowed to transport it to and from the range. If caught off route there are serious consequences.

If these types of restrictions were put in place it might be a step in the right direction.

GPIG

Post   » Tue Dec 08, 2015 5:52 pm


Where I hunt pheasant, I know terrible of me but it's the last thing I hunt and it's something I do with my son who loves it. We are only allowed 3 shells in a shotgun as well, and must use a plug to prevent a higher capacity. You can us the plastic stick/plug that comes with the shotgun or you could even use a branch from a tree to restrict the capacity to 3 shells. We’ve had game wardens check, as long as no more than 3 can get in, we’re fine. The idea came out of an attempt for sportsmanship to give birds a chance instead of having 5 or 6 shots with pump or semiauto.

However, to change the capacity all you have to do is remove the plug. Additionally , you can add a cheap extension tube which is easyily purchased, like $20 (they may be illeageal in Canada though, I;m not sure) and applied and you have a shotgun that could potentially hold about 15 rounds making it a potentially dangerous weapon.

As for handguns, in my state we have the exact same requirements and law you have about transportation to and from range. The problem is that California has even tougher laws than the state I live in and those laws were in place during the recent mass murdering. So many things they were doing were illegal and it didin’t stop them.

Not trying to give people an education on firearms but rather to illustrate the deep problems there are with restrictions. Every time you think you may have a solution on the gun side, there is a way around it. Mechanical people will find modifications when presented with a engineering problem to solve.

I wish I had the answer to stop all this but I don’t. I am willing to listen to anything though.

User avatar
snowflakey
E's Moriarity

Post   » Tue Dec 08, 2015 6:13 pm


People will always break the law. It is never a reason to not create a reasonable law or to enforce a reasonable law. People will run red lights. It is dangerous. It kills people. But we aren't going to throw away traffic laws because someone breaks them. I know that is a somewhat trivial example, but I think you can port it to issues of sensible gun laws.

So some guy in an open carry state, with an open carry license, goes to his kid's school with a gun in his holster (which has a policy to go on lockdown if someone on the school premises has a gun). He is asked not to have a gun. He says "it's my right" and the school contacts local law enforcement to get an idea of what to do (since it is an open carry state) and is told to follow their lockdown policy, and have a discussion with the dad about why it's best not to open carry in the school even though it is an open carry state and he's licensed. The school makes an appointment for him to come in and come to an agreement about it. He shows up with his gun! So the school officials tell him that they must follow their policy and go into lockdown. The dad then leaves once the school begins the lockdown process.

What is wrong with that jerk? This whole open (and conceal) carry nonsense is insane. Just this weekend a "good guy with a gun" was shot in a hostage situation in my state, because when he came out of the building with his weapon, and didn't drop it, the police shot him. The "good guy with a gun" is a complete myth. Open carry and conceal carry do not make anyone safer. Just ask the folks in colorado springs who were shot on the street by a young man: someone called 911 and told the dispatcher that there was a guy with a gun walking around looking suspicious, and the dispatcher said "nothing we can do; it's not illegal" - until he shoots some people up. Then it is both illegal and a tragedy.

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:32 am


Interesting article on NPR:

Congress Still Limits Health Research On Gun Violence


Right now, the CDC studies all kinds of violence. There's a program on child abuse and youth violence, and the public health agency collects data on suicides and sexual assaults.

But there are some glaring research gaps. The CDC doesn't systematically collect data on deaths at the hands of law enforcement, and there's actually a law that effectively stops it from doing research on gun violence.

Whole article:

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/12/08/45895282 ... gun-violence

Erinspigs

Post   » Fri Dec 11, 2015 1:27 pm


GPIG, I disagree with you. I don't know about deputizing people or any of that but statistics show overwhelmingly where states allowed people to carry firearms violent crime decreased significantly. Maybe those people aren’t prepared for combat situations, gunfights or whatever you want to call it but it can’t be denied some criminals believe they will be shot by someone legally carrying a gun if they attack them. I'm not going to list the statistics here they are available by searching and reading whatever you wish.

The decrease in crime was significant enough where the data proves over time and number of incidents this to be accurate despite any manipulating of numbers.

piggypie

Post   » Fri Dec 11, 2015 2:59 pm


Erinspigs, have you heard "correlation does not equal causation"?

Just because a state allows open carry has a lower rate of violent crimes than a state that does not allow open carry does not equal open carry reduces violent crime.

There are so many control factors missing to make that determination. You need to factor in, the population, the socioeconomic factors, what other crime reduction factors were in place, what the crime rate was before the open carry, what the crime rate after the open carry etc.

Simply comparing and apple and an orange together doesn't mean that the orange is better for you than the apple.

Erinspigs

Post   » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:23 pm


Yes Piggypie, I understand what you're saying, had to look up causation though:) In the scenario I'm writing of, violent crime decreased when the concealed carry laws became law in every state (have to double check that but if not every state I know it's darn near it).

In fact, most groups calling for stricter gun control don't debate this data as being accurate. I suppose anyone can draw their own conclusions but when you examine the numbers, it would be one heck of a coincidence.

bpatters
And got the T-shirt

Post   » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:34 pm


Erinspigs, one thing to include in your investigation is what resources were available to prevent and investigate violent crime at the time the stats are moving, up or down. I lived in Philadelphia at a time when violent crime was down. But there was plenty of federal money for cops and investigative teams and surveillance equipment and whatever. When those federal funds dried up, the crime rate started gradually climbing, then climbed rather sharply. It had nothing to do with the availability of personal weapons.

piggypie

Post   » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:41 pm


There are 8 states that don't allow open carry. You can't simply compare Florida (no open carry) to Texas (open carry), just because Texas has lower per capita violent crime rate doesn't mean that the open carry caused that.

It simply isn't possible to do a proper study on what specifically makes violent crimes go down. Also is there a problem with reporting of said violent crimes? There are lots of victims of rape that never report it. There's one flaw right there.

User avatar
Wheekers3

Post   » Fri Dec 11, 2015 5:04 pm


Also mental health and available resources may have something to do with it.

Most mass murderers weren't having legal gun or crime issues before they decided to make that deadly choice.

Just some postulations by me. I haven't backed that up, so excuse me if statictically wrong.

User avatar
Lynx
RESIST

Post   » Fri Dec 11, 2015 5:38 pm


Data can be manipulated so thoroughly.

More guns, more gun deaths. This, however, is a fact.

Post Reply
294 posts