PDA

View Full Version : some good reading



Phillip Allen
04-12-2014, 06:59 PM
"Could this mean federal indictments are finally to be handed down against the G-men who murdered all those innocent souls at Waco and Ruby Ridge?"

http://www.vinsuprynowicz.com/?p=1868#more-1868

Chip-skiff
04-12-2014, 07:23 PM
In your mind, are the nutcases who were equipped with large stocks of weapons and ammunition who barricaded themselves "innocent souls"? Perhaps their children, who died as a result of their violent madness, were innocent.

The Bigfella
04-12-2014, 07:42 PM
I was just wondering the other day, what do kids read these days?

We used to have all those great war comics. Learnt all about burp guns and the like.

Phillip Allen
04-12-2014, 10:35 PM
In your mind, are the nutcases who were equipped with large stocks of weapons and ammunition who barricaded themselves "innocent souls"? Perhaps their children, who died as a result of their violent madness, were innocent.

this is a poor and unconsidered responce... I'll let it go another day to see if there are any better

Ian McColgin
04-12-2014, 10:45 PM
From NYT we get a pretty good summary of the executive actions that are part of Obama's constitutional duty and that are things he has been able to do regarding firearms safety without Congress.

from http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/03/obama-announces-gun-control-actions/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

After the legislation failed, Mr. Obama vowed to take whatever steps his administration could through executive action. He later issued 25 executive orders intended to tighten the rules for gun ownership.

Among the orders that Mr. Obama already signed are efforts to include more information about mental illness in the federal background check system, new efforts to research the causes of gun violence, incentives for schools to hire more security officers, and new requirements for federal authorities to trace guns used in crimes.

In the latest executive actions, the Department of Justice is proposing to clarify that the term “committed to a mental institution” includes involuntary outpatient as well as inpatient commitments.

The clarification would help states determine what information should be made accessible to the federal background check system.

The Department of Health and Human Services relaxed some privacy protections to help identify in the background check system those people who, under federal law, should be prohibited from owning a gun for mental health reasons. A recent investigation by the New York Times showed how powerless law enforcement can be when it comes to keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.

The department proposed a rule to give certain entities covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act permission to submit to the background check system the “limited” information required to prevent people with mental illness from obtaining firearms.

“Too many Americans have been severely injured or lost their lives as a result of gun violence,” the White House said in an email statement.

“While the vast majority of Americans who experience a mental illness are not violent, in some cases when persons with a mental illness do not receive the treatment they need the result can be tragedies such as homicide or suicide.”

The White House added, “The federal background check system is the most effective way to assure that such individuals are not able to purchase a firearm from a licensed gun dealer.”

Michael D. Shear contributed reporting from Washington.

Phillip Allen
04-12-2014, 10:54 PM
if I were intent on infringing on the right to keep and bear arms... would I call it 'gun ownership restrictions' or 'gun safety'?

while we're at it, Ian, are there any Obama signened executive orders requiring the gathering of data on the actual shooters and stabbers of their taking of any anti psycotic meds or any other mood/personality drugs... especially those used/reccomended by the education industry to make their charges more 'manageable'?

Phillip Allen
04-12-2014, 10:59 PM
add to that second question above: do the pharmacy companies have any influence on playing down any possible negative effects of such drugs?

Jim Bow
04-12-2014, 11:04 PM
The OP's link is to a blog written by someone who labels himself "America's Champion of Liberty."
Self appointed.

None for me, thanks.

Ian McColgin
04-12-2014, 11:12 PM
Good point in two ways. Preventing dangerous mentally ill people from obtaining guns improves safety by indeed infringing on their right to have a gun. But while some of our recent really outrageous shootings have been committed by people in the grip of some insanity, most gun deaths are not the result of either a predictable insanity or any insanity at all, so these federal actions to make the laws Congress has already passed actually work (the NRA is always saying to use the laws we have) will have minimal effect. If Obama is able to fund objective research, perhaps that will lead to the understanding it takes to reduce gun deaths.

From my point of view, most of the proposed gun control laws are pointless. I believe in a balance of federal, state and local laws involving licensing for use of firearms and registration of all firearms not unlike the auto regulation model. As with autos, such regulation will not end wrongful firearms deaths, but as with autos it can reduce the carnage and make apprehension and punishment of criminal killings more likely.

Some of the laws and research have already led to increased safety despite industry resistance. Advanced trigger locks really work. Advanced holsters make an unauthorized person taking a firearm off the person carrying much harder. Improved mechanisms reduce the liklihood of accidental discharge.

And in some states a minister can lawfully direct congregants to check their guns at the door.

Progress has happened and it can continue.

Phillip Allen
04-12-2014, 11:50 PM
Ian... I don't think you actually have a very clear view on what you propose

Phillip Allen
04-12-2014, 11:50 PM
anyone gonna take on posts 6 and 7?

The Bigfella
04-13-2014, 12:07 AM
if I were intent on infringing on the right to keep and bear arms... would I call it 'gun ownership restrictions' or 'gun safety'?

while we're at it, Ian, are there any Obama signened executive orders requiring the gathering of data on the actual shooters and stabbers of their taking of any anti psycotic meds or any other mood/personality drugs... especially those used/reccomended by the education industry to make their charges more 'manageable'?


add to that second question above: do the pharmacy companies have any influence on playing down any possible negative effects of such drugs?


anyone gonna take on posts 6 and 7?


Didn't the NRA do some jiggery pokey to stop research happening?

Are you lobbying them to ensure proper research is done?

You didn't even know every 41st American male death for the last 30 years involved a bullet... until I told you. Did you?