Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
jonnyrig
climber
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2015 - 11:39pm PT
|
None of us gets out alive, but we can damn sure fight for our time here. Even against heart disease and cancer. The knee-jerk reactions when a shooting occurs are somewhat understandable; but the continued irrationality of thinking that the gun banning proposals are an adequate solution without addressing contributory (often DRIVING factors) unnecessarily persecute a substantial percentage of the population.
Weird, considering the arguments that have been made in fighting against many of the changes now upheld as basic human rights represent sometimes a lesser percentage of the population than firearms owners. (Gay marriage, anyone?)
In those debates, arguments against expanding our freedoms run the gamut to include such things as protecting religious beliefs, upholding traditional family values that create the basic fabric of the nation, and general good moral standing, without which the country would surely fall into chaos ill repute.
But guns? Naw, man. Nobody should defend their right to have them when a shooting goes down. Gun nutz should just shut their traps about how much bigger their dicks are for owning one. Cause, according to a number of forum members on this site, that's what it all comes down to.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2015 - 11:43pm PT
|
MD 1, your a pretty sick individual to place blame on the reverend for not allowing guns in their church.
Ahh... another one calling me sick for simply citing a publicly-available, objective fact.
In this "great" nation, we've become such a bunch of pantywaists that "certain" truths just can't be cited.
That pastor had a perspective. It's shared by too many: The cops will protect us from anything bad ever happening. We've seen too many times that this perspective is head-in-sand.
ANYBODY who takes that perspective and is then victimized because they WOULD NOT take responsibility for themselves is an unnecessary victim. Better to have the capacity to at least put up a fight.
To me, it's no different from climbing a Yosemite big wall in Summer, so you decide you don't need any warm clothing. A sudden storm moves in. How DARE it? Utterly negligent, unprepared, you need rescue or die. To my mind, you should pay for your own rescue if you live. No excuse.
Now THAT's "blaming the 'victim'" and rightly so.
|
|
jonnyrig
climber
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2015 - 11:56pm PT
|
Look, the shooting was clearly driven by race, by hate. I'm responding to the hate against firearms, which seems to pervade this thread, as it does in most other threads around here when guns are mentioned, to the point of nearly taking the thread off-topic to the original idea. You want to take it back on track, bring the discussion around to why this was a hate crime, the motivation leading to it, and how to cure that... man that would be great. The gun was just the tool. There is SOOOOOO much more going on that should be under discussion.
Yet, once again, here we are debating shooting sticks. That, i'm sure you'd agree, is totally. f*#king. lame.
There is undoubtedly a good deal more this country can do to cure the inequalities experienced by different races. It goes beyond that... we have race, gender, age discrimination, anti-gay (where plenty of hate crime has been committed), etc etc etc. What makes you think I'm not in support of solving racial (or other types of) discrimination here? Because I own a gun?
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 08:11am PT
|
"Knee-jerk" reactions, jig? Seems to me people are just throwing out the idea that the availability of guns needs to be discussed and debated, given that they are used to murder people on a daily basis and are the weapon of choice for mass murderers. I'd suggest that the knee-jerk reaction comes from the gun lobby and their minions. Any mention of gun control of any kind and the predictable push back arguments are launched (government takeover, Jade Helm, no more bullets because Obama and Holder are massing them,....).
I'd bet you have guns enough for several lifetimes. Got a couple myself. Plunk some cans, sure. Don't mind a 10 round reload in CA, not concerned. I interpret the 2nd amendment differently, I wasn't around with the founders, nor were you. We have an army I don't need a militia, especially an unregulated one.
You're right about the racial hatred that drove this massacre. That should be our focus. Taking that confederate flag down with by a good start, even if it is symbolic. This nutjob was radicalized by a far right culture that exaggerates black on white crime, a mindset that creeps into mainstream media.
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 08:19am PT
|
Don't you think?
That if a single black person had a gun at that church, and killed that White Boy after he started his killing spree, The cops would have come in and shot the black person Dead, and then blamed it on him.
Blacks do not have the same rights as the Privileged White when it comes to guns, and little else.
I didn't make this up, Mark Thompson from MIP exposed this hypocrisy, which is true from their view point.
V
Cragman
prove me wrong
rather than just adding a ultra lame snide remark
It's called debating
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 08:36am PT
|
Fact is probably a bit strong don't you think. A very highly likely outcome nonetheless.
Where was Zimmerman when he could have done some good. Oops, he may have shot the black people too, in a new twist we'll call mutual self-defending?
EDIT: Looks like the rug was pulled out from under me. Somebody said "fact".
|
|
johnboy
Trad climber
Can't get here from there
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 08:59am PT
|
So MD, everyone should carry a gun at all times out of a fear. Sounds like an inane way to live.
BTW, I read your post about the one time you brandished your gun for nothing more than a percieved threat. Had they been armed you likely wouldn't be here. You didn't prevent an escalation, you had nothing to justify what you did except for your fear.
Blaming the pastor with a parallel of weather to guns lacks a retort.
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 09:12am PT
|
Some of the conservative fear of Blacks come from a little known historical event.
The Haitian Revolution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_Revolution
When the Black slaves revolted, got weapons and killed almost white person in the Country.
Of course it could never happen again, but to have mind numming fear of the impossible is spoon fed to the conservatives to keep up the gun sales.
1791 slave rebellion
Enlightened writer Guillaume Raynal attacked slavery in the 1780 edition of his history of European colonization. He also predicted a general slave revolt in the colonies, saying that there were signs of "the impending storm".[38] One such sign was the action of the French revolutionary government to grant citizenship to wealthy free people of color in May 1791. Because white plantation owners refused to comply with this decision, within two months isolated fighting broke out between the former slaves and the whites. This added to the tense climate between slaves and grands blancs.[39]
Raynal's prediction came true on the night of 21 August 1791, when the slaves of Saint Domingue rose in revolt and plunged the colony into civil war. The signal to begin the revolt was given by Dutty Boukman, a high priest of vodou and leader of the Maroon slaves, during a religious ceremony at Bois Caïman on the night of 14 August.[40] Within the next ten days, slaves had taken control of the entire Northern Province in an unprecedented slave revolt. Whites kept control of only a few isolated, fortified camps. The slaves sought revenge on their masters through "pillage, rape, torture, mutilation, and death".[41] Because the plantation owners had long feared such a revolt, they were well armed and prepared to defend themselves. Nonetheless, within weeks, the number of slaves who joined the revolt reached some 100,000. Within the next two months, as the violence escalated, the slaves killed 4,000 whites and burned or destroyed 180 sugar plantations and hundreds of coffee and indigo plantations.[41]
|
|
jonnyrig
climber
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 09:21am PT
|
johnboy, you weren't there at MB's incident. You're making every bit the same kind of assumption that other people are speculating on regarding "what they would have done" in the situation that occurred with this shooting.
That kind of sh#t needs to stop.
"What I would have done..."
"You're wrong about the situation in which you were involved. Here's what really happened..."
Give me a f*#king break. It's speculation. It adds nothing to the discussion.
|
|
jonnyrig
climber
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 09:37am PT
|
crankster
Trad climber
Jun 21, 2015 - 08:11am PT
"Knee-jerk" reactions, jig? Seems to me people are just throwing out the idea that the availability of guns needs to be discussed and debated, given that they are used to murder people on a daily basis and are the weapon of choice for mass murderers. I'd suggest that the knee-jerk reaction comes from the gun lobby and their minions. Any mention of gun control of any kind and the predictable push back arguments are launched (government takeover, Jade Helm, no more bullets because Obama and Holder are massing them,....).
Yes, knee-jerk reactions. Guilty on both sides of the argument. As to how many guns I have, and how many I need, that's subjective, isn't it? Mass murders have been effectively carried out with traditional hunting rifles, bolt action and such, one round at a time. I keep bringing up the DC sniper in these discussions, and people keep glossing it over. That brings up the question of what's a reasonable limitation on firearm and ammunition availability.
Hi-cap mags and semi-autos are a relatively more recent development. Considering their effectiveness and popularity among those bent on mass murder, it probably warrants discussion and analysis about how to limit their availability to the general public, as well as whether it's a legitimate and effective strategy to reduce mass shootings.
Given, however, the already wide-spread distribution of such firearms, ammo, and magazines, it's going to be a very long time before any sort of passive regulation against this weaponry has any chance of effectively reducing their availability to those who wish to kill. So while you're at it, maybe you could throw a few proposals out there that would help reduce suicide, poverty, racial tension, racial inequality, and drug abuse; because all of them seem to play a huge role in what we consider to be mass murder.
Anyhow, I'm tired of participating in this discussion. Chew, spew, rinse, repeat.
|
|
johnboy
Trad climber
Can't get here from there
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 10:35am PT
|
My perception of what he actually wrote. He expressed his fear of three of them sitting there. He brandished his gun to prevent what he thought might happen (fear). No speculation there.
His blaming anyone without a gun at all times to fend off an incident is just an extention of his fear.
I don't understand all the fear considering that all the data you you put up indicating how unlikely it is to ever happen.
|
|
johnboy
Trad climber
Can't get here from there
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 10:44am PT
|
The DC sniper killings happened over a long period of time. He didnt just walk in and start mowing people over. So your right in respect to the gun used, but that was rare and I don't see many trying to take humting rifles away.
Now if that changes to being a regular happening then we might start seeing a push back on humting rifles too. There is a reason why most mass murders choice of weapons is a semiauto.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 10:49am PT
|
The Rev had nothing to do with no guns in church, it's a SC state law.
For what it's worth every mass shooting since 1950 with only two exceptions happened in a "gun free zone".
The predators that perpetrate these acts seek out places where they will not face the possibility of an armed defender.
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 11:19am PT
|
The Rev had nothing to do with no guns in church, it's a SC state law.
For what it's worth every mass shooting since 1950 with only two exceptions happened in a "gun free zone".
The predators that perpetrate these acts seek out places where they will not face the possibility of an armed defender.
TGT, logic only works for the logical.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 01:09pm PT
|
Huckabee won't be 'baited' into Confederate flag debate, says it's not a ‘presidential’ issue
|
|
TradEddie
Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 01:50pm PT
|
All other countries have constitutions that presume that governments grant rights, and thus that governments can take them away. Our government was designed in unique fashion, whereby the definition of tyranny was built in: ANY government that fails to uphold and protect inalienable rights is tyrannical, regardless of how "benevolent" it might appear to any particular subset of the governed
Why would anyone trust your opinion or interpretation of vague principles when you can't even accurately post simple facts?
While possibly unique and certainly revolutionary in the 1780's, to say that no other country constitutionally recognizes inalienable rights or a duty to protect them is laughably inaccurate.
By your definition of tyranny, can you provide a single example in the entire history of mankind where a society of more than ten thousand people was governed without tyranny? It certainly wasn't the original United States which explicitly refused to protect the inalienable rights of slaves, nor the United States that to this day asserts the right to forcibly draft its citizens into military service.
TE
|
|
Stewart
Trad climber
Courtenay, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 21, 2015 - 02:34pm PT
|
So the solution to all of these massacres is for people to grab more guns?
What a sick, pathetic excuse for logic.
For whatever it's worth, I've stated many times that I'm not unacquainted with firearms and happen to be a pretty good shot. That said, I would strongly resist any movement to make carrying firearms in public legal in my nation and, since your weapons have a habit of crossing the border, in the U.S. as well.
The ENTIRE PLANET is royally pissed off with the United States for yet another mass murder of innocents committed by yet another piece of white trash with an easily obtainable firearm.
Mass shootings are not completely unheard of in other advanced industrialized democracies, as detailed in the American Bar Association web site, but with nowhere even close to the same frequency as the U.S.
I repeat: there is something evil about the obscene love affair far too many gun owners have with their personal death machines, and it is far beyond time for true U.S. patriots to seek measures to cure this cancer that is destroying the nation.
I repeat again: It is time for citizens to pay infinitely less attention to the "rights" of people to pack firearms in public, and ensure that the rights of human beings not to get shot is enshrined in the Bill of Rights.
Unfortunately, scientists are still searching in vain for a cure for wilful pig-ignorance.
Make love, not war.
|
|
jonnyrig
climber
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2015 - 02:53pm PT
|
^^^
Not really, just opinionated.
I repeat: it's time to put more emphasis on curing the social ills that lead to violent crime committed with any weapon.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!