Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ

Board index » Off-topic » Anything goes




 Page 2 of 4 [ 65 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next



Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 2:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:20 pm
Posts: 1363
Location: San Francisco
Driaz wrote:
BOND wrote:
Quote:
interracial gang violence and the propagation of the illegal drug trade?
:lol: :o :(

Seriously? NO. Seriously? Wow. :evil:

It must suck to have to cower behind a gun. Especially when that gun won't buy you a wooden nickel. Good luck with the coyotes and other varmints...because it won't get you jack-squat against the people you fear. It's time to let it go. Like other civilized countries who have been here far far longer than us. And realized the stupidity of allowing this bs to happen. You have your right... for now. And not much longer. Raise your flag.... because it will count. It's not Fantasy Country. Most gang violence isn't "interracial", btw. And if you don't like illegal drugs, quit making them so. Problem solved. See: Prohibition. Jesus. Boom, boom. Really?!


Wow Bond, lay off the brownies dude......the irony is so rich with this one......banning guns is good, will end all evil.....banning drugs is bad, people will still get drugs around prohibition......


Hehe... What a great drunk post/rant that I don't remember writing. Awesome. :oops: I don't even know what some of it means! I'm in favor of gun control. I'm in favor of decriminalization of "drugs". I'm in favor of accessible mental healthcare. That's it. Everything else seems to be a hodge-podge of comments from a CNN forum on this subject I had been reading earlier in the day. Varmints?! Wooden nickle?! Who knows... Glad you took it as well as you did. I think I should apologize. :?

Interesting stats:

In the United States, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2009: 2.98
2008: 3.12
2007: 3.36
2006: 3.42
2005: 3.43
2004: 3.20
2003: 3.3
2002: 3.25
2001: 3.12
1999: 2.97
1998: 3.37
1993: 7.07

In Mexico, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2010: 10.0
2009: 7.9
2008: 4.6
2007: 3.7
2006: 6.09
2005: 5.51
2004: 2.7
2003: 2.9
2002: 6.70
2001: 7.21
2000: 7.10
1999: 4.54
1998: 3.45
1997: 5.3
1994: 9.88

In the Netherlands, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2010: 0.2
2009: 0.3
2008: 0.3
2007: 0.3
2006: 0.3
2005: 0.4
2004: 0.4
2003: 0.35
2002: 0.39
2001: 0.43
2000: 0.41
1999: 0.47
1998: 0.37
1997: 0.4
1996: 0.46
1994: 0.36


The regulation of guns in the Netherlands and Mexico is categorised as restrictive. The regulation of guns in the United States is categorised as permissive. A big difference here then has to be the criminality of drugs and their "offenders" and the business that surrounds the enterprise. I would also posit Mexico's much larger numbers are attributed to the rise of organized violence in recent years due to the drug trade. Obviously, the US' numbers should be skewed by gang-related violence as well. Legalizing or decriminalizing illegal drugs would go a long way towards ending this insanity. Hand in hand with a restrictive gun policy, we might have numbers like the Netherlands. :)

_________________
Bad Ortiz, No Donut!


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 5:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:32 pm
Posts: 1541
Location: Tucson
BOND wrote:


Hehe... What a great drunk post/rant that I don't remember writing. Awesome. :oops: I don't even know what some of it means! I'm in favor of gun control. I'm in favor of decriminalization of "drugs". I'm in favor of accessible mental healthcare. That's it. Everything else seems to be a hodge-podge of comments from a CNN forum on this subject I had been reading earlier in the day. Varmints?! Wooden nickle?! Who knows... Glad you took it as well as you did. I think I should apologize. :?

Interesting stats:

In the United States, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2009: 2.98
2008: 3.12
2007: 3.36
2006: 3.42
2005: 3.43
2004: 3.20
2003: 3.3
2002: 3.25
2001: 3.12
1999: 2.97
1998: 3.37
1993: 7.07

In Mexico, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2010: 10.0
2009: 7.9
2008: 4.6
2007: 3.7
2006: 6.09
2005: 5.51
2004: 2.7
2003: 2.9
2002: 6.70
2001: 7.21
2000: 7.10
1999: 4.54
1998: 3.45
1997: 5.3
1994: 9.88

In the Netherlands, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2010: 0.2
2009: 0.3
2008: 0.3
2007: 0.3
2006: 0.3
2005: 0.4
2004: 0.4
2003: 0.35
2002: 0.39
2001: 0.43
2000: 0.41
1999: 0.47
1998: 0.37
1997: 0.4
1996: 0.46
1994: 0.36


The regulation of guns in the Netherlands and Mexico is categorised as restrictive. The regulation of guns in the United States is categorised as permissive. A big difference here then has to be the criminality of drugs and their "offenders" and the business that surrounds the enterprise. I would also posit Mexico's much larger numbers are attributed to the rise of organized violence in recent years due to the drug trade. Obviously, the US' numbers should be skewed by gang-related violence as well. Legalizing or decriminalizing illegal drugs would go a long way towards ending this insanity. Hand in hand with a restrictive gun policy, we might have numbers like the Netherlands. :)


:lol: No problems, man.......it's not an easy issue and folks are passionate in their beliefs.......wooden nickel.....:lol:

You do bring up a very valid point, and one that another poster on another message board I frequent made......regardless of the strictness of gun control laws, the countries that are key in illegal drug trafficking have the highest rates of gun violence. That's why Mexico, even with stricter gun control laws have higher rates of gun violence because the vast majority of illegal drug trade into the US flows through there.

I'm not ready to embrace the decriminalization of all illegal drugs, but so many of our problems in this country are due to the black market and the delivery of illegal drugs to the end users, it makes one wonder how much better off we would be to dry up that illegal market.....


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 6:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:17 pm
Posts: 2262
Location: Oakland, CA
I don't think we need to ban guns but we need sensible controls. Every gun related transaction should include database checks, whether it is purchasing a gun at walmart, a gun show, or a private transaction. Guns need to be registered so that we can track the change of custody. We could even expand it to purchasing ammunition.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:20 pm
Posts: 1363
Location: San Francisco
Driaz wrote:
BOND wrote:


Hehe... What a great drunk post/rant that I don't remember writing. Awesome. :oops: I don't even know what some of it means! I'm in favor of gun control. I'm in favor of decriminalization of "drugs". I'm in favor of accessible mental healthcare. That's it. Everything else seems to be a hodge-podge of comments from a CNN forum on this subject I had been reading earlier in the day. Varmints?! Wooden nickle?! Who knows... Glad you took it as well as you did. I think I should apologize. :?

Interesting stats:

In the United States, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2009: 2.98
2008: 3.12
2007: 3.36
2006: 3.42
2005: 3.43
2004: 3.20
2003: 3.3
2002: 3.25
2001: 3.12
1999: 2.97
1998: 3.37
1993: 7.07

In Mexico, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2010: 10.0
2009: 7.9
2008: 4.6
2007: 3.7
2006: 6.09
2005: 5.51
2004: 2.7
2003: 2.9
2002: 6.70
2001: 7.21
2000: 7.10
1999: 4.54
1998: 3.45
1997: 5.3
1994: 9.88

In the Netherlands, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is

2010: 0.2
2009: 0.3
2008: 0.3
2007: 0.3
2006: 0.3
2005: 0.4
2004: 0.4
2003: 0.35
2002: 0.39
2001: 0.43
2000: 0.41
1999: 0.47
1998: 0.37
1997: 0.4
1996: 0.46
1994: 0.36


The regulation of guns in the Netherlands and Mexico is categorised as restrictive. The regulation of guns in the United States is categorised as permissive. A big difference here then has to be the criminality of drugs and their "offenders" and the business that surrounds the enterprise. I would also posit Mexico's much larger numbers are attributed to the rise of organized violence in recent years due to the drug trade. Obviously, the US' numbers should be skewed by gang-related violence as well. Legalizing or decriminalizing illegal drugs would go a long way towards ending this insanity. Hand in hand with a restrictive gun policy, we might have numbers like the Netherlands. :)


:lol: No problems, man.......it's not an easy issue and folks are passionate in their beliefs.......wooden nickel.....:lol:

You do bring up a very valid point, and one that another poster on another message board I frequent made......regardless of the strictness of gun control laws, the countries that are key in illegal drug trafficking have the highest rates of gun violence. That's why Mexico, even with stricter gun control laws have higher rates of gun violence because the vast majority of illegal drug trade into the US flows through there.

I'm not ready to embrace the decriminalization of all illegal drugs, but so many of our problems in this country are due to the black market and the delivery of illegal drugs to the end users, it makes one wonder how much better off we would be to dry up that illegal market.....


Shit. We agree! It is the end of the world! :lol: I appreciate your tolerance for my once in awhile black-out posts. I think the mere fact we can all have a dialogue about this is something good. I don't have any answers, but, seriously, we have to look at the rest of the world, what they do better, what we don't...vice versa. I think we're all on the same page as far as what we cherish, love, respect, honor... I wish I had the answers. :( Happy holidays!

_________________
Bad Ortiz, No Donut!


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:20 pm
Posts: 1363
Location: San Francisco
@Driaz: Btw, that's why I included Mexico in those stats. They have by far the worst per capita gun deaths but their gun laws are stricter than ours. I'm with Matt... I'm not saying we ban all guns... but there has to a) be a reason, b) go through a bunch of checks and balances. Shit, I walk around in some of the most dangerous neighborhoods in America with a $5000+ guitar. I want a concealed gun permit. In SF? It will never happen. But, even if it did....? If I write black-out drunk posts, it probably shouldn't. :oops: :(

In the words of Elmer Fudd, "It's cwazy!"

_________________
Bad Ortiz, No Donut!


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:32 pm
Posts: 1541
Location: Tucson
BOND wrote:
@Driaz: Btw, that's why I included Mexico in those stats. They have by far the worst per capita gun deaths but their gun laws are stricter than ours. I'm with Matt... I'm not saying we ban all guns... but there has to a) be a reason, b) go through a bunch of checks and balances. Shit, I walk around in some of the most dangerous neighborhoods in America with a $5000+ guitar. I want a concealed gun permit. In SF? It will never happen. But, even if it did....? If I write black-out drunk posts, it probably shouldn't. :oops: :(

In the words of Elmer Fudd, "It's cwazy!"


Nobody that would want to rob you would even have the knowledge to know how valuable your guitar is........Thankfully!

When I got robbed out there, they got $40-$50 bucks.......I got my credit cards cancelled before any charges were even attempted.....

It's probably good that I didn't have a firearm with me.......killing a two bit fuck for stealing $50 isn't worth it.....being on vacation without knowing anyone to help me out after that sucked ass though.....


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 8:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:32 pm
Posts: 1541
Location: Tucson
matt wrote:
I don't think we need to ban guns but we need sensible controls. Every gun related transaction should include database checks, whether it is purchasing a gun at walmart, a gun show, or a private transaction. Guns need to be registered so that we can track the change of custody. We could even expand it to purchasing ammunition.


The only one of those 3 circumstances.....walmart, gun show, or private transaction that doesn't go through the existing database checks is private transaction......

Gun registry I'm on the fence over, but there is the potential for the government to go after those registered gun owners......Give me a good reason why the government should have a list of people and what guns they own, and I'll listen......but mostly think this is a bad idea.......


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 8:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:20 pm
Posts: 1363
Location: San Francisco
Driaz wrote:
killing a two bit fuck for stealing $50 isn't worth it


Exactly. Nor is killing them over a $5,000 guitar. Yes, protecting anybody from serious harm (not a fist-fight about looking at your girlfriend's tits), and incapacitating them is important. We need Spiderman, not guns. :)

What I think is ridiculous is the stance that many take that they have to have guns to protect themselves from the government. They have things called cruise missiles and satellites and, oh, a ton of weapons that can take you out from... anywhere. Who and what we vote for protects us from our government. Our government is us.

_________________
Bad Ortiz, No Donut!


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 9:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:32 pm
Posts: 1541
Location: Tucson
BOND wrote:
Driaz wrote:
killing a two bit fuck for stealing $50 isn't worth it


Exactly. Nor is killing them over a $5,000 guitar. Yes, protecting anybody from serious harm (not a fist-fight about looking at your girlfriend's tits), and incapacitating them is important. We need Spiderman, not guns. :)

What I think is ridiculous is the stance that many take that they have to have guns to protect themselves from the government. They have things called cruise missiles and satellites and, oh, a ton of weapons that can take you out from... anywhere. Who and what we vote for protects us from our government. Our government is us.


For at least the past 20 years there has been almost 50% of the country that hates the President and doesn't trust him.....


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 10:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:17 pm
Posts: 2262
Location: Oakland, CA
Driaz wrote:
matt wrote:
I don't think we need to ban guns but we need sensible controls. Every gun related transaction should include database checks, whether it is purchasing a gun at walmart, a gun show, or a private transaction. Guns need to be registered so that we can track the change of custody. We could even expand it to purchasing ammunition.


The only one of those 3 circumstances.....walmart, gun show, or private transaction that doesn't go through the existing database checks is private transaction......

Gun registry I'm on the fence over, but there is the potential for the government to go after those registered gun owners......Give me a good reason why the government should have a list of people and what guns they own, and I'll listen......but mostly think this is a bad idea.......

We have to register to vote and that keeps getting more and more difficult.... That is the most basic of all rights and certain states have done a lot to prevent people from registering.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:32 pm
Posts: 1541
Location: Tucson
matt wrote:
Driaz wrote:
matt wrote:
I don't think we need to ban guns but we need sensible controls. Every gun related transaction should include database checks, whether it is purchasing a gun at walmart, a gun show, or a private transaction. Guns need to be registered so that we can track the change of custody. We could even expand it to purchasing ammunition.


The only one of those 3 circumstances.....walmart, gun show, or private transaction that doesn't go through the existing database checks is private transaction......

Gun registry I'm on the fence over, but there is the potential for the government to go after those registered gun owners......Give me a good reason why the government should have a list of people and what guns they own, and I'll listen......but mostly think this is a bad idea.......

We have to register to vote and that keeps getting more and more difficult.... That is the most basic of all rights and certain states have done a lot to prevent people from registering.


The purpose behind being registered to vote is to try and ensure that the people voting actually have the right to vote. I'm not against back ground checks for purchasing firearms (which would be similar.....verifying the person has the right to purchase a firearm)......to have to register them into a government database, I'm not so sure about.....the only uses of such a list could only be used for two purposes......to tax them for whatever reason, and to come knocking on our door to take them away......

Can you think of any other reason that would be more compelling as to why we should have to tell the government about which firearms we own?


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:20 pm
Posts: 1363
Location: San Francisco
Sure. Accountability. :?

Orrrr... we want to know who the maniac is that just shot 30 people.Vis a vis ANY kind of trail.

_________________
Bad Ortiz, No Donut!


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:32 pm
Posts: 1541
Location: Tucson
BOND wrote:
Sure. Accountability. :?

Orrrr... we want to know who the maniac is that just shot 30 people.Vis a vis ANY kind of trail.


I don't know that I'm understanding your point. When have we ever failed to identify one of these sick people AFTER they shoot up a bunch of people?

The key is to try and identify these people before they do something horrific like this and try to get them help.....No federal tracking of who buys what firearms is going to do that....

As an aside not in any way a response to what you posted, but I really wish the media would never show photos or release the names of these sick people that do these kinds of things. They do this awful horrific shit as a final cry out for attention. Don't give them what they so desire by doing this, that is the fame and making their name a household item that everyone knows.....


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:32 pm
Posts: 1541
Location: Tucson
I just thought of another reason a national gun registry is a bad idea......as with everything technical, it will be prone to hacking.....I don't think we want targeted burglary based on if you have several guns when you aren't at home, or more bold robberies of houses that have no guns regardless of whether you are home or not.....

You're giving a criminal a fucking gold mine of information about which houses to target whatever his risk/reward threshold is.....and for no obvious good benefit to the government to offset the potential bad effects of a registry......I'm no longer on the fence of a national registry, I'm fully against one now.....


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 9:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:37 am
Posts: 5048
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/24/us/new-yo ... ?hpt=hp_t1

Armed guards on Fire Trucks too? sigh.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:17 pm
Posts: 2262
Location: Oakland, CA
They had a full time cop at Columbine.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:19 pm
Posts: 1580
Over 15000 people die every year over alcohol related car accidents. One solution would be to install a mandatory breathalyzer ignition switch in every car. It would be ridiculous of me to think this would ever happen. Nobody likes to be inconvenienced. Even though it would save so many lives. It seems that being inconvenienced is the one thing we as americans fear the most. Time will pass and tragedies will fade. A year from now we probably won't see much of change in gun and ammo laws. My prediction for 2013 is that there will be 8500 gun related deaths and 2 new TV shows about guns. I have an aversion to watching the news when tragedies like mass shootings happen. I have a fear that one of the major networks will have a computer generated reenactment of the massacres. Fear is something that the news profits the most from and keeps us coming back. I have noticed a change in myself since I stopped watching the news and started listening to NPR radio. I'm not afraid and depressed about my country anymore, but I am more aware of my surroundings.

_________________
“In place of thoughts it has impulses, habits, and emotions.” ― Edward L. Bernays


Last edited by Dewberry on Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:37 am
Posts: 5048
Id be fine with breathalyzer ignition switches. two wrongs dont make a right. I dont disagree wtih your point about the media sensationalizing all of this, but that doesnt mean we should fix problems.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 2:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:20 pm
Posts: 1363
Location: San Francisco
See: Grace, Mark

_________________
Bad Ortiz, No Donut!


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Armored Back Packs ? MORE Guns in Schools ?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 8:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:17 pm
Posts: 2262
Location: Oakland, CA
I could see breathalyzer ignition as long as it isn't set so low that a beer with dinner doesn't cause it to shut down. It would be a large cost burden to add on to a new car though.


Top 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
 Page 2 of 4 [ 65 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next




Board index » Off-topic » Anything goes


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: