Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: who does NOT want more American gun control?

Posted 1 year ago on Feb. 5, 2013, 6:08 p.m. EST by mideast (506)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

17 Comments

17 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by mideast (506) 1 year ago

Today would have been Treyvon Martin's 18th birthday
RIP

[+] -4 points by chuckuschumer (-366) 1 year ago

Hoodie McSkittles tried to kill George,George reacted and unfortunately Hoodie couldn't learn a lesson from this instead of dying for nothing.

Gun control isn't the answer. Gun control is the low information voter's answer. It's simple and easy for their low information minds to comprehend. The real solutions to these problems will not be addressed by Obama or the Democrats/RINO's.

The solutions for these problems are not compatible with the Obama/Democrat ultimate agenda of disarming Americans to better create the population of Sheeple that have no recourse then to be subjugated and ruled.

[-] -2 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Now hold on there when you say the "population of Sheeple that have no recourse then to be subjugated and ruled" the vast majority of people on this site represent that remark.

Oh and lets not forget the vast majority of "subjugated and ruled and controlled by laws" individuals who live in the "big cities"

[-] 0 points by Narley (531) 1 year ago

Not sure I get your point. However, I agree that none of Obama’s or Feinstein’s proposed legislation will reduce gun crime. Not even a little bit.

Criminals have never gotten background checks. Do you really believe they will start if a new law is passed. They’ll use a straw buyer, just like they do now.

Banning semi-auto rifles? There are already millions, maybe tens of millions, of AR’s and AK’s that will be grandfathered in. At best it would take two generations to reduce the numbers of AR’s and AK’s.

Reducing mag capacity to ten rounds? Won’t help. By far the most common gun in America is semi-auto pistol that hold between 14 – 20 rounds. All will be grandfathered. Besides most shootings involve only fire 3 – 5 rounds. Not to mention you can change a mag in less than a second. mag restrictions are pointless.

Mental health checks? This is one area everyone agrees on. No one wants someone not mentally fit to own a gun. Most states already have that in there gun laws. We need to make sure people diagnosed as being unfit are in the database. The flip side is, who will decide who is mentally unfit? As someone else said on another thread, it’s going to be a slippery slope.

[-] -2 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

I was just doing a follow up comment - nothing derogatory - just in true humor. I agree - background checks won't do a thing . We have a "violent society" problem and that is what needs to be addressed.

There are thousands of laws on the books that aren't being enforced. The Feds already have a "mental illness/firearm restrcition law on the book that isn't being enforced.

Here's the link:

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/niaafrpc.pdf

[-] -1 points by chuckuschumer (-366) 1 year ago

Yep,you got it. Tis a shame but it is the reality of our times.

[-] -1 points by chuckuschumer (-366) 1 year ago

Yep,you got it. Tis a shame but it is the reality of our times.

[-] 1 points by WSmith (2033) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Nothing New Under the Wingnut Sun: 'Survivalism'

Rick Perlstein on February 2, 2013 - 3:46 PM ET

Photograph from National Geographic’s Doomsday Preppers, courtesy of National Geographic Channel

There’s nothing new under the wingnut sun.

Survivalists are back in the news this week, though now we call them “preppers.” In Alabama the hostage standoff against a doomsday prepper holding a 5-year-old in a bunker he’d been working on in the middle of the night for over a year approaches the end of its first week. Adam Lanza shot up the children of Sandy Hook elementary with weapons his mother was reportedly stockpiling “for the economic and social meltdown.” And the brittle worldview that drives the survivalist mentality—the imagination of one’s one innocent enclave, always ever threatened by siege from dread unnamed Others—was laid bare at the recent congressional hearings on gun control, when Gayle Trotter of the Independent Women’s Forum (incidentally: not independent, not by and for women, not a forum) spun out her delirious fantasy of “a young woman defending her babies in her home” by fending off “three, four, five violent attackers” with one of those lightweight, easy-to-handle assault rifles.

Recently a young blogger, in a nice profile of the diverse subculture as it thrives now, unfortunately described preppers as a “nascent” movement. That ain’t so. As I’ve insisted earlier, “too much of what we observe today on the right we act as if started the day before yesterday. Always, we need to set the clock back further—as a political necessity. We have to establish deeper provenances. Or else we just reinvent, and reinvent and reinvent the wheel.” Let’s think about this: for generations we have shared our America with Americans who fear change, fear difference, fear you and me, fear everything falling apart. So much so that they organize their lives and politics around staving off the fear—which often entails taking political action that only makes America more fearful and dangerous in for everyone; which destroy the trust and love it takes to sustain communities; and who reinforce one another in their fear to such a degree that the less crazy among them surely play a positive role in spurring the more crazy to the kind of awful acts we see around us now. We need to better understand where that comes from, and why it is not going away.

So let’s get down to work.

In the early 1960s there was a group called the “Minutemen,” preparing for the imminent combined Communist and United Nations invasion. Their founder, Robert DePugh, a manufacturer of veterinary phamarceuticals in Misssouri, told the press that while waiting for the final showdown, his men would monitor and check subversive activities in their hometowns. DePugh claimed inspiration from a speech given by John F. Kennedy: “We need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take up arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as a basic purpose of their daily life.”

Make no mistake: armed right-wing enclave-defenders aren’t just a function of their hatred for Democrats; they are also enabled by Democrats who braid paranoia into the political identity of the nation—Cold War paranoia then, “Homeland Security” paranoia now.

The stickers they distributed included read ones reading “REGISTER COMMUNISTS, NOT FIREARMS,” and tiny one members would slap on restroom walls or inside phone books featuring an image of rifle cross hairs, and this text: “See that old man at the corner where you buy your papers?… He may have a silencer equipped pistol under his coat. That fountain pen in the pocket of the insurance salesman that calls on you might be a cyanide gas gun. What about your milkman? Arsenic works slow but sure.… Traitors, beware! Even now the crosshairs are on the back of your necks.”

In 1966, Minutemen were arrested in a raid after FBI infiltration indicated they were on the verge of attacking three pacifist camps in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. They had stockpiled rockets, bombs and literally tons of ammunition. (You can read all about the group in this excellent book published at the time.)

What was DePugh’s connection to later preppers and survivalists? It was direct. In 1973 he published Can You Survive? Guidelines for Resistance to Tyranny for You and Your Family. Read the Amazon comments (“Everything they don’t want you to know…”); some people still find it useful now. And note the cover of the paperback. Like I said: the enclaves of innocents, always ever threatened by sudden siege by dread unnamed Others. Be prepared.

By the way, heard that new one? That a liberal is a conservative who’s been incarcerated? According to an article in his hometown newspaper published upon his 2009 death, “DePugh spent four years in federal prison and wrote a book about the plight of the incarcerated. Many consider it his best and most compassionate work.”

But that article also noted, “His ideas were so out of whack with what most poeple were thinking that the great majority of people laughed him off as a kook.” Not precisely so. The culture DePugh helped midwife grew and grew—so much so that, by 1981, Peter Arnett, then of the Associated Press, did a four-part series on the subject. It began: “Small but growing bands of Americans are arming themselves and learning how to kill because they are convinced the social order is crumbling and they will have to and they will have to fend for themselves to surive…. “There are inner perimeters in America today, places people are reluctant to leave for fear of their own safety. The national perimeter no longer seems secure.’”

Enclaves of innocents, always ever threatened by sudden siege by dread unnamed Others.

And now we have the hit new cable series.

Is there a continuity of culture here? Well, consider the reviews by the podcasting proprietor behind TodaysSurvival.com of “Best of the 80s Survivalist Books” (“The gem, the golden find of this book is his reloading tables: He has provided load data for virtually every cartidge in existence…with only 3 powders. This is incredibly helpful to the survivalist reloader who may anticipate reloading ammunition for themselves, and possibly others. By storing only 3 types of powder one may reload everything from the 219 Zipper to 300 Weatherby Magnum to .44 Special and everything in between. This book is out of print, but Mr. Stair is alive and well. He runs the ‘End Times Report’ web site, which sells a pamphlet containing the reloading data in the ‘booklet’ section.”)

There’s nothing new under the wingnut sun—only that, these days, you’re more likely to find ideas that once upon a time might have got you laughed off as a kook aired out in front of respectable congressional committees.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/172619/nothing-new-under-wingnut-sun-survivalism

[-] 1 points by WSmith (2033) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Nothing scarier in the dark than the sound of a pump action

I heard a guy on the radio the other day argue the case for being able to buy those extended clips for your semi-automatic guns. It was the one you've been hearing lately that's based on the idea that even experienced shooters have a hard time hitting a moving target, and you really need the extra 20 rounds. He actually presented his case in a way that I couldn't disagree with. You see he is blind. You have to acknowledge that no amount of practice or training is going to make him a good shot.

Really, this puts the lie to the case the gun nuts make for their paranoid delusion that the only thing keeping them safe is that gun under their pillow. If that were true at all, blind people would be extinct. (sure the blind are victims more than the sighted, so don't write me) The fact is that competent, sane people should keep a defensive weapon in the house with a trigger lock. If unlocking it is going to take too long, you should spend your money on better locks and plant some thorn bushes under your windows.

A short barrel 12 gauge pump is your best choice, but even that requires a lot of practice. Join a skeet club if you don't go to Camp David on weekends. A handgun is really way beyond the skill level of most people. Do you own one, have you fired 10,000 rounds for practice? For most people it's just a much needed penis extender. The assault rifle isn't any better for somebody with no real training, but a load of bird shot will take down any lawyer criminal, just ask Dick Cheney, and that wasn't even a 12 gauge. www.prairie2.com

[-] -1 points by DeathsHead1 (-111) 1 year ago

And that is a stupid cartoon. You anti 2nd Amendment fanatics need to do better on your propaganda.

[-] -2 points by DeathsHead1 (-111) 1 year ago

I don't.

[-] -2 points by highlander (-163) 1 year ago

I admit it. I do not want more gun control.

[-] -2 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Firearms control is not going to solve the problem. If it did then why are there so many deaths in all the big cities. Unless you threaten to give people "frontal labatomies" if they are convicted of killing someone it isn't going to stop.

So you decide to "make everyone have a background check". Lets say you have two druggies who can leagally posess firearms - One druggie decides he want to increase his turf.

He and the other druggie with a "legally owned firearm" meet in a secluded area, gunfire erupts and one of the druggies is dead. The other flees the scene.

So tell me how will police be able to "hunt down the fleeing druggie" when no one was around to "finger him".

And if it did happen in a "drug infested neighborhood" do you really think someone is going to "rat on him".

So please tell me how more regulations will stop "violent" people from killing other people be they innocent or violent?

[-] 1 points by mideast (506) 1 year ago

How many gun deaths were there in big cities?
London?
Berlin?
Paris?

[-] -1 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Norway has far and away the highest firearm ownership per capita in Western Europe, it nevertheless has the lowest murder rate.

Other nations with high firearms ownership and comparably low murder rates include Denmark, Greece, Switzerland, Germany and Austria.

Holland has a 50 percent higher murder rate despite having the lowest rate of firearm ownership in Europe.

And Luxembourg, despite its total handgun ban, has a murder rate that is nine times higher than countries such as Norway and Austria.

It turns out that in nations where guns are less available, criminals manage to get them anyway.

After decades of ever-stricter gun controls, England banned handguns and confiscated them from all permit holders in 1997. Yet by 2000, England had the industrialized world's highest violent crime rate -- twice that of the U.S. Despite the confiscation of law-abiding Englishmen's handguns, a 2002 report of England's National Crime Intelligence Service lamented that while "Britain has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, [i]t appears that anyone who wishes to obtain a firearm [illegally] will have little difficulty in doing so."

Here's the link should you desire to read more:

http://gunowners.org/op0746.htm

[-] -3 points by auargent (-600) 1 year ago

you know that gun contol is not about guns, its about control. "among the many misdeeds of british rule in india, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest" gandhi , written in his autobigraphy.

[-] -2 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

I know as well but if you look at where the vast majority of crimes that are comitted they are comitted in "big cities" - not nearly as much in rural America.

And it is those people who want to ban firearms because the "big cities" banned their firearms.