Re: Mind's Eye Re: Newtown Killings

civic vigilance has not worked in the not worked in the past.. why do
you think it will work now? all that has lead to is the situation
there is now,, where maniacs go around murdering people at will.
Sorry civic vigilance is not a solution it is part of the problem..
Allan

On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 4:17 AM, Don Johnson <dajohn@gmail.com> wrote:
> The answer is more civic vigilance. The media saturation of this event
> has us all on red alert. Perhaps more options will be made available
> to those of us taking care of mentally disturbed individuals. That
> would be a good thing but for now I have to have a fairly large
> support group available for help as needed. Friends, family and
> church. I do keep my gun in a safe btw.
>
>
> dj
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 9:41 AM, archytas <nwterry@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Given the god-like power to change this situation in the US I'd
>> probably look closely at what the Australians did and go for a ban on
>> personal holding of guns, ammo and explosives. Britain had its own
>> wild west times - highwaymen and smugglers ruled substantial areas
>> here once. More recently we had plenty of people with explosives
>> engaged in land clearance (blowing up tree stumps etc.) - the most
>> famous was Blaster Bates who became an itinerant comedian. None of
>> them or our farmers blew up any schools as far as I know. It has
>> generally taken a cause (like romantic republicanism) to cause such in
>> Britain - even they baulked at attacking schools.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm really against organising our societies to cope with scum and
>> nutters and think the real answers lie in more sharing and commitment
>> to each other. I could probably blow our town hall up with
>> ingredients in the kitchen and shed - but suspect the preparation time
>> would cool me off! A lot of the problem is ease of access to easily
>> used weapons in deranged moments. Though its all easier with assault
>> rifles and even more so with drone missiles, dedicated lunatics with
>> short swords have been as effective in history and Japanese hornets
>> slay whole bee hives by individual decapitation. The term carnage
>> comes from a point in history before gunpowder.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Deep down I think the US should disarm - but I also think some of
>> those naively in favour of this are as much part of the problem as the
>> NRA. It's good to know Don has more sartorial grace than to favour
>> purple berets. I dislike hats generally, but would support armbands -
>> 'Dads' Army' perhaps! In parts of the word a single AKM would disrupt
>> the balance of power. I doubt anyone would think providing truckloads
>> of them a good idea in such circumstances. I don't know the answer -
>> but it's fairly obvious foreign policy is killing more people than
>> lack of domestic gun control.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> To protect police stations on the mainland under the IRA threat,
>> uniform cops were posted to sentry duty unarmed. Quite what good this
>> was supposed to do was never explained. I suspect designated school
>> defenders would, likewise, simply become the first target of the mad
>> shooter and probably be armed with pea-shooters. The cost of decent
>> guarding is probably the equivalent of hiring two teachers - and you
>> are sacking teachers.
>>
>> With the answer beyond us for so long one has to wonder if we can
>> break up the arguments in a different way and think about piecing the
>> results together in a different manner.
>> On 24 Dec, 01:10, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It's really hard to know what to do Don. The so-called arguments are
>>> clearly factional and largely ignorant on all sides. One reason the
>>> shotgun laws in the UK were so lax was they were made in deference to
>>> the aristos who owned them. I wouldn't swap the UK situation for that
>>> in the US (or Jamaica) but it is obvious that legislation isn't any
>>> kind of answer on its own. I'm not even sure the criminal evil and
>>> those gone mad would be deterred by an army of folk like me and you as
>>> citizens on patrol - and they might even join up.
>>> Molly's right about mental care - but who'd want to be a social worker
>>> in homes full of guns?
>>>
>>> On 23 Dec, 22:11, Don Johnson <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > Guns and ammunition sales are through the roof around here. Especially
>>> > heavy assault rifles. Ammunition is so expensive I don't really even
>>> > go to the range anymore.
>>>
>>> > A tax on gun owners is unacceptable to me. We already take on extra
>>> > risk and responsibility just by having one. I'll take one of your
>>> > suggestions to heart Archy, Let's increase civil responsibility. Let's
>>> > actually ENCOURAGE law abiding citizens to own and carry weapons
>>> > rather then demonize the practice. (Seems to me the NRA is the gun
>>> > owners only line of defense in the public eye and they are roundly
>>> > demonized) It's sad most of the folks I know that are responsible and
>>> > smart would never own a gun because of the stigmatism. However I know
>>> > plenty of less-then-intelligent and cavalier individuals that are "gun
>>> > enthusiasts." The same type of person that owns a pit bull not for the
>>> > fact that they are loving loyal lap dogs but because they have a
>>> > reputation for meanness.
>>>
>>> > I'd be ok with testing folks before they could own a gun.(maybe we
>>> > should do that for pit bull owners as well) Much like what the
>>> > concealed carry laws are in Texas. I'd even be ok with a written exam
>>> > on safety and gun care that would be hard enough to keep the idiots
>>> > from owning and carrying. I think it would be great if those taking
>>> > that extra responsibility got some perks here and there. Maybe skip
>>> > the line at the post office and DPS and so forth. We could have
>>> > special purple berets made up with "citizen watch" written in Latin
>>> > with an image of a sniper or something on it. Ok now I'm kidding.
>>> > Purple isn't my color. Complimentary ammo to stay in practice would be
>>> > nice tho.
>>>
>>> > dj
>>>
>>> > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > Google threw up two ads for body armour and ammunition on the last
>>> > > text!
>>>
>>> > > On 23 Dec, 18:47, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >> it would be a new system.. one to be created,, you are fighting the
>>> > >> NRA (pain in the butt) this is the only way I can see that you can
>>> > >> avoid them saying you are interfering with the right to bear arms..
>>> > >> this way you have the right to own any gun only difference is you
>>> > >> have to pay taxes every year on that gun.. those that have great
>>> > >> hordes of weapons would have to pay an annual taxes that would
>>> > >> discourage this type of activity with out eliminating the right to
>>> > >> bear arms..
>>>
>>> > >> as for the revenue as it would be a new revenue source how it is
>>> > >> split would be created..
>>>
>>> > >> I can see the NRA saying we don't want to pay taxes getting them far
>>> > >> away from their comfort zone..
>>> > >> and you are right the time to strike is now.,, this idea is new?
>>> > >> but feasible and it would get control of assault style weapons via
>>> > >> taxes and the requirement to register all weapons you can not be told
>>> > >> that you are picking on one style of gun.. and part of the law could
>>> > >> include seizure of all un registered weapons..
>>>
>>> > >> just a thought
>>> > >> Allan
>>>
>>> > >> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >> > I can't pretend to know anything about federal revenue streams, Alan, but do
>>> > >> > understand that whatever the system, including the current one or lack
>>> > >> > thereof, we all pay. The Sunday talking heads here all had much to say on
>>> > >> > the subject. This time something may be done before interest fades.
>>>
>>> > >> > On Sunday, December 23, 2012 11:18:40 AM UTC-5, Allan Heretic wrote:
>>>
>>> > >> >> I was thinking Molly is require the registration of all guns and
>>> > >> >> pistols and tax them based on the danger to society with say single
>>> > >> >> shot guns to the lowest rate to fully automatic and statistical
>>> > >> >> weapon.. you are welcome to own them they have to be registered and
>>> > >> >> taxes have to be paid yearly and that tax not be used to lessen other
>>> > >> >> taxes.. it would serve to lower the desirability and at the same time
>>> > >> >> raise revenue for other things like providing for police forces and
>>> > >> >> school protection,
>>> > >> >> Allan
>>>
>>> > >> >> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Molly <moll...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >> >> > Determining funding is always the best first step. Allowing facilities
>>> > >> >> > to
>>> > >> >> > opt in and out, based on their current security is essential. An
>>> > >> >> > estimated
>>> > >> >> > one third of US schools currently have armed security. I didn't think
>>> > >> >> > much
>>> > >> >> > of it knowing that the high school my kids attended had one full time,
>>> > >> >> > and
>>> > >> >> > sometimes more, local police on duty, along with other unarmed security.
>>> > >> >> > The guy that worked full time at the school was a friend, and felt
>>> > >> >> > himself
>>> > >> >> > fortunate to have the assignment. He was a kid at heart. A good cop
>>> > >> >> > too.
>>>
>>> > >> >> > On Sunday, December 23, 2012 2:47:58 AM UTC-5, Allan Heretic wrote:
>>>
>>> > >> >> >> ammunition also
>>> > >> >> >> Allan
>>>
>>> > >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Allan H <allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >> >> >> > Hmm an annual tax on all guns might be nice and any not registered
>>> > >> >> >> > for
>>> > >> >> >> > taxation an immediate confiscation,,
>>> > >> >> >> > Allan
>>>
>>> > >> >> >> > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 5:39 AM, archytas <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >> >> >> >> I can't think of it at the moment James. In one amazingly stupid
>>> > >> >> >> >> episode in Northern Ireland our government went in for disarming -
>>> > >> >> >> >> and
>>> > >> >> >> >> disarmed the police. Ludicrous as this was, the 'Troubles' in the
>>> > >> >> >> >> late 60s/early 70s can rightly be described in part as a police
>>> > >> >> >> >> riot.
>>> > >> >> >> >> 20 years of horror there could have been averted had we been able to
>>> > >> >> >> >> take the realities to heart as Molly suggests. The NRA farce
>>> > >> >> >> >> reminded
>>> > >> >> >> >> me of our Parliament grilling managerial clowns from Google,
>>> > >> >> >> >> Starbucks
>>> > >> >> >> >> and Amazon on tax avoidance - with them all claiming the highest
>>> > >> >> >> >> ethical standards - none of them 'knew' any details of where the
>>> > >> >> >> >> offshore money is, how much there is and how a company selling
>>> > >> >> >> >> coffee
>>> > >> >> >> >> can manage not to pay corporation tax in the country they sell it
>>> > >> >> >> >> in.
>>> > >> >> >> >> The managers were clearly patsies put up to evade revealing the
>>> > >> >> >> >> details - the politicians such dupes they had got the wrong people
>>> > >> >> >> >> and
>>> > >> >> >> >> couldn't present an analysis of the books. The Starwucks twerp was
>>> > >> >> >> >> issuing propaganda on 'job creation' as though big companies like
>>> > >> >> >> >> that
>>> > >> >> >> >> don't really trash more jobs in the competition.
>>>
>>> > >> >> >> >> How will we raise the money for more cops Moll? - we need more here
>>> > >> >> >> >> too for equally pressing reasons. A tax on the gun owners? In
>>> > >> >> >> >> economic terms we are in the realm of externalities - gun purchase
>>> > >> >> >> >> doesn't include payment for the problems they cause - not dealing
>>> > >> >> >> >> early with our crooks and 'mad' people transfers the cost to victims
>>> > >> >> >> >> and so on. I think we should be dealing with these issues by
>>> > >> >> >> >> expanding civil society.
>>>
>>> > >> >> >> >> On 23 Dec, 01:55, James <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >> >> >> >>> The best explanation I heard was the spokesperson who issued that
>>> > >> >> >> >>> tirade
>>> > >> >> >> >>> on Friday was a patsy, at best hiding behind the shield of popular
>>> > >> >> >> >>> opinion of the NRA servicing the lunatic fringe, while doing untold
>>> > >> >> >> >>> damage to the members they are supposed to represent (of which,
>>> > >> >> >> >>> opinion
>>> > >> >> >> >>> polls appear not to be mostly lunatics, nor in agreement with NRA
>>> > >> >> >> >>> policy
>>> > >> >> >> >>> positions), is in fact on the take from special industry interests,
>>> > >> >> >> >>> and
>>> > >> >> >> >>> at worst all-of-the-above without an ounce of reservation or
>>> > >> >> >> >>> conscience
>>> > >> >> >> >>> other than to lobbying interests. Triple agent theories aren't
>>> > >> >> >> >>> worth
>>> > >> >> >> >>> the
>>> > >> >> >> >>> energy, greed and ignorance sums up DC nicely indiscriminately IMO.
>>> > >> >> >> >>> Who
>>> > >> >> >> >>> would be in the best position to rile up fear among large
>>> > >> >> >> >>> populations
>>> > >> >> >> >>> and get the gov't to move it's pieces in line, who stands the most
>>> > >> >> >> >>> to
>>> > >> >> >> >>> gain? Does a rhetorical question require a question mark?
>>>
>>> > >> >> >> >>> Shame indeed Molly. This guy is probably destined to get canned
>>> > >> >> >> >>> within
>>> > >> >> >> >>> a
>>> > >> >> >> >>> year, and leave with a little severance bonus and a nice handful of
>>> > >> >> >> >>> chips to play in the next round of dupe the morons. Organized crime
>>> > >> >> >> >>> has
>>> > >> >> >> >>> a nasty word for it I can't remember, lend me a hand Archy?
>>>
>>> > >> >> >> >>> On 12/22/2012 8:02 AM, Molly wrote:
>>>
>>> > >> >> >> >>> > I agree, Alan. there are issues with types of guns, number of
>>> > >> >> >> >>> > guns,
>>> > >> >> >> >>> > guns accessible to folks with documented mental instability.
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> read more »
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
>
>
>



--
(
)
|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Of course I talk to myself,
Sometimes I need expert advice..

--