Cranbury Forum | Bulletin | Info Sharing
[Click here to bookmark this page: http://cranbury.info]
▪
Cranbury School
▪
Cranbury Township
▪
Cranbury Library
▪
Cranbury.org
▪
Cranburyhistory.org
(Press Ctrl and = keys to increase font size)
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
[http://cranbury.info]
->
News | Events
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Emoticons
Font colour:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Font size:
Tiny
Small
Normal
Large
Huge
Close Tags
[quote="publius-109q"]"Those with mental disorders should not be allowed near guns". Did you really need a Phd to figure that one out? At issue, right now, is why any civilian should have access to weaponry that should be limited to the police and the military. Should any citizen have a real need to have and use bullets that explode on impact? Pardon the bad pun, but, this is overkill. We're not against rifles used for hunting, or guns used for protection, but the types of guns whose sole purpose is to kill and destroy living, biological organisms. If you are so paranoid that you really need 47 guns, perhaps you should move elsewhere. I don't think that your "freedom" to own an armory full of weapons trumps other people's freedom to move about without fear of being blown to pieces by your insanity. The UK has few gun. They also have few gun deaths. Most police there don't even carry guns! Yet, we need to be armed to the teeth to protect ourselves from some phantom enemy? Maybe this is what happens when you are the world's lone superpower? The people go crazy thinking that there is a potential killer behind every shrub? I think that sometimes that the need for more guns is more the product of a fevered mind than it is of a defender of the 2nd amendment. Perhaps the constitution should be changed to underline the bit about THE WELL REGULATED MILITIA. Nah...............theres no money in it for the gun lobby nor the gun show guys! I bet if Adam Lanza's Mother had been a gunowner, she could've stopped her son before he left the house. oh.........wait a minute........[/quote]
Options
HTML is
ON
BBCode
is
ON
Smilies are
ON
Disable HTML in this post
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Jump to:
Select a forum
Topics
----------------
News | Events
School | Parenting
Blogs by Cranbury Residents
Shopping | Good Deals | Price Talk
Home Sweet Home
House For Sale
Home Sales Pricing Records
Financial | Stocks | Mutual Funds
Cool Bytes & Bits
Garage Sale | ForSale Ads | Things to Trade
Tech Related (PC, Internet, HDTV, etc.)
Interesing and Fun Stuff to Share
What's Your Favorite?
Interests | Hobbies
Cranbury History
Radom Thoughts | Sports | Kitchen Sink
Amazon Deals
Local Business Info
----------------
Local Business Ads (FREE)
Support
----------------
Daily Sponsored Message & Amazon Ads
About Us | Your Privacy | Suggestion | Sponsored
Test Area (Practice your posting skills here)
Topic review
Author
Message
publius-109q
Posted: Sat, Dec 22 2012, 2:31 pm EST
Post subject: Re: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
anon-o690 wrote:
Why don't you move to the UK if you like it so much.
Perhaps you should move to Somalia!
I understand that they have very lax gun control laws there.
It's a right-wing nut paradise!!!
Enjoy yourself, Zippy.
publius-109q
Posted: Sat, Dec 22 2012, 2:30 pm EST
Post subject: Re: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
anon-65qn wrote:
The solution to gun violence is clear
By Fareed Zakaria, Published: December 19
Announcing Wednesday that he would send proposals on reducing gun violence in America to Congress, President Obama mentioned a number of sensible gun-control measures. But he also paid homage to the Washington conventional wisdom about the many and varied causes of this calamity — from mental health issues to school safety. His spokesman, Jay Carney, had said earlier that this is “a complex problem that will require a complex solution.” Gun control, Carney added, is far from the only answer.
In fact, the problem is not complex, and the solution is blindingly obvious.
People point to three sets of causes when talking about events such as the Newtown, Conn., shootings. First, the psychology of the killer; second, the environment of violence in our popular culture; and, third, easy access to guns. Any one of these might explain a single shooting. What we should be trying to understand is not one single event but why we have so many of them. The number of deaths by firearms in the United States was 32,000 last year. Around 11,000 were gun homicides.
To understand how staggeringly high this number is, compare it to the rate in other rich countries. England and Wales have about 50 gun homicides a year — 3 percent of our rate per 100,000 people. Many people believe that America is simply a more violent, individualistic society. But again, the data clarify. For most crimes — theft, burglary, robbery, assault — the United States is within the range of other advanced countries. The category in which the U.S. rate is magnitudes higher is gun homicides.
The U.S. gun homicide rate is 30 times that of France or Australia, according to the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, and 12 times higher than the average for other developed countries.
So what explains this difference? If psychology is the main cause, we should have 12 times as many psychologically disturbed people. But we don’t. The United States could do better, but we take mental disorders seriously and invest more in this area than do many peer countries.
Is America’s popular culture the cause? This is highly unlikely, as largely the same culture exists in other rich countries. Youth in England and Wales, for example, are exposed to virtually identical cultural influences as in the United States. Yet the rate of gun homicide there is a tiny fraction of ours. The Japanese are at the cutting edge of the world of video games. Yet their gun homicide rate is close to zero! Why? Britain has tough gun laws. Japan has perhaps the tightest regulation of guns in the industrialized world.
The data in social science are rarely this clear. They strongly suggest that we have so much more gun violence than other countries because we have far more permissive laws than others regarding the sale and possession of guns. With 5 percent of the world’s population, the United States has 50 percent of the guns.
There is clear evidence that tightening laws — even in highly individualistic countries with long traditions of gun ownership — can reduce gun violence. In Australia, after a 1996 ban on all automatic and semiautomatic weapons — a real ban, not like the one we enacted in 1994 with 600-plus exceptions — gun-related homicides dropped 59 percent over the next decade. The rate of suicide by firearm plummeted 65 percent. (Almost 20,000 Americans die each year using guns to commit suicide — a method that is much more successful than other forms of suicide.)
There will always be evil or disturbed people. And they might be influenced by popular culture. But how is government going to identify the darkest thoughts in people’s minds before they have taken any action? Certainly those who urge that government be modest in its reach would not want government to monitor thoughts, curb free expression, and ban the sale of information and entertainment.
Instead, why not have government do something much simpler and that has proven successful: limit access to guns. And not another toothless ban, riddled with exceptions, which the gun lobby would use to “prove” that such bans don’t reduce violence.
A few hours before the Newtown murders last week, a man entered a school in China’s Henan province. Obviously mentally disturbed, he tried to kill children. But the only weapon he was able to get was a knife. Although 23 children were injured, not one child died.
The problems that produced the Newtown massacre are not complex, nor are the solutions. We do not lack for answers.
What we lack in America today is courage.
The US is a violent nation by it's very Nature.
Look at it's history.
What happened to the Native Indians?
What happened during the internecine struggle called the "Civil" War?
Look at what they did to people during the civil rights period.
They used dogs to attack people who protested for their rights to be treated as citizens.
Look at the jump to go to war, especially, that mistake called the Iraqi invasion. Other nations tried to talk us out of it, but, our minds were made up to go there and screw with things.
It's easy for some moron to just say. "My country, love it or leave it" "If you don't like it here, move elsewhere".
Simple words from simple minds!
A true patriot would want to fix things and make them better.
By the attitude of the love it or leave it crowd we would have never started a war for independence from Britain in the first place!!!
It's a shame that so many Americans are ignorant of their own history and their nations place among other nations in the world.
Maybe it's time to stop all of this stupid "ass-kicking" all over the world, and focus on getting our own house in order.
Or, maybe it's just easier to leave and go somewhere else.
Somalia might be nice!
publius-109q
Posted: Sat, Dec 22 2012, 2:18 pm EST
Post subject: Re: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
anon-o690 wrote:
Why don't you move to the UK if you like it so much.
Perhaps you should move to Somalia!
I understand that they have very lax control laws there.
It's a right-wing nut paradise!!!
Enjoy yourself, Zippy.
anon-65qn
Posted: Thu, Dec 20 2012, 10:24 am EST
Post subject: Re: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
The solution to gun violence is clear
By Fareed Zakaria, Published: December 19
Announcing Wednesday that he would send proposals on reducing gun violence in America to Congress, President Obama mentioned a number of sensible gun-control measures. But he also paid homage to the Washington conventional wisdom about the many and varied causes of this calamity — from mental health issues to school safety. His spokesman, Jay Carney, had said earlier that this is “a complex problem that will require a complex solution.” Gun control, Carney added, is far from the only answer.
In fact, the problem is not complex, and the solution is blindingly obvious.
People point to three sets of causes when talking about events such as the Newtown, Conn., shootings. First, the psychology of the killer; second, the environment of violence in our popular culture; and, third, easy access to guns. Any one of these might explain a single shooting. What we should be trying to understand is not one single event but why we have so many of them. The number of deaths by firearms in the United States was 32,000 last year. Around 11,000 were gun homicides.
To understand how staggeringly high this number is, compare it to the rate in other rich countries. England and Wales have about 50 gun homicides a year — 3 percent of our rate per 100,000 people. Many people believe that America is simply a more violent, individualistic society. But again, the data clarify. For most crimes — theft, burglary, robbery, assault — the United States is within the range of other advanced countries. The category in which the U.S. rate is magnitudes higher is gun homicides.
The U.S. gun homicide rate is 30 times that of France or Australia, according to the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, and 12 times higher than the average for other developed countries.
So what explains this difference? If psychology is the main cause, we should have 12 times as many psychologically disturbed people. But we don’t. The United States could do better, but we take mental disorders seriously and invest more in this area than do many peer countries.
Is America’s popular culture the cause? This is highly unlikely, as largely the same culture exists in other rich countries. Youth in England and Wales, for example, are exposed to virtually identical cultural influences as in the United States. Yet the rate of gun homicide there is a tiny fraction of ours. The Japanese are at the cutting edge of the world of video games. Yet their gun homicide rate is close to zero! Why? Britain has tough gun laws. Japan has perhaps the tightest regulation of guns in the industrialized world.
The data in social science are rarely this clear. They strongly suggest that we have so much more gun violence than other countries because we have far more permissive laws than others regarding the sale and possession of guns. With 5 percent of the world’s population, the United States has 50 percent of the guns.
There is clear evidence that tightening laws — even in highly individualistic countries with long traditions of gun ownership — can reduce gun violence. In Australia, after a 1996 ban on all automatic and semiautomatic weapons — a real ban, not like the one we enacted in 1994 with 600-plus exceptions — gun-related homicides dropped 59 percent over the next decade. The rate of suicide by firearm plummeted 65 percent. (Almost 20,000 Americans die each year using guns to commit suicide — a method that is much more successful than other forms of suicide.)
There will always be evil or disturbed people. And they might be influenced by popular culture. But how is government going to identify the darkest thoughts in people’s minds before they have taken any action? Certainly those who urge that government be modest in its reach would not want government to monitor thoughts, curb free expression, and ban the sale of information and entertainment.
Instead, why not have government do something much simpler and that has proven successful: limit access to guns. And not another toothless ban, riddled with exceptions, which the gun lobby would use to “prove” that such bans don’t reduce violence.
A few hours before the Newtown murders last week, a man entered a school in China’s Henan province. Obviously mentally disturbed, he tried to kill children. But the only weapon he was able to get was a knife. Although 23 children were injured, not one child died.
The problems that produced the Newtown massacre are not complex, nor are the solutions. We do not lack for answers.
What we lack in America today is courage.
anon-65qn
Posted: Thu, Dec 20 2012, 10:17 am EST
Post subject: Re: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
The solution to gun violence is clear - Fareed Zakaria
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-the-solution-to-gun-violence-is-clear/2012/12/19/110a6f82-4a15-11e2-b6f0-e851e741d196_story.html
really-8p94
Posted: Wed, Dec 19 2012, 11:45 pm EST
Post subject: Re: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
anon-o690 wrote:
You are a idiot!
lighten up Francis
anon-o690
Posted: Wed, Dec 19 2012, 6:52 pm EST
Post subject: Re: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
Why don't you move to the UK if you like it so much.
anon-o690
Posted: Wed, Dec 19 2012, 6:50 pm EST
Post subject: Re: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
You are a idiot!
publius-109q
Posted: Mon, Dec 17 2012, 3:04 pm EST
Post subject: Re: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
"Those with mental disorders should not be allowed near guns".
Did you really need a Phd to figure that one out?
At issue, right now, is why any civilian should have access to weaponry that should be limited to the police and the military. Should any citizen have a real need to have and use bullets that explode on impact?
Pardon the bad pun, but, this is overkill.
We're not against rifles used for hunting, or guns used for protection, but the types of guns whose sole purpose is to kill and destroy living, biological organisms. If you are so paranoid that you really need 47 guns, perhaps you should move elsewhere. I don't think that your "freedom" to own an armory full of weapons trumps other people's freedom to move about without fear of being blown to pieces by your insanity.
The UK has few gun.
They also have few gun deaths.
Most police there don't even carry guns!
Yet, we need to be armed to the teeth to protect ourselves from some phantom enemy?
Maybe this is what happens when you are the world's lone superpower?
The people go crazy thinking that there is a potential killer behind every shrub?
I think that sometimes that the need for more guns is more the product of a fevered mind than it is of a defender of the 2nd amendment.
Perhaps the constitution should be changed to underline the bit about THE WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
Nah...............theres no money in it for the gun lobby nor the gun show guys!
I bet if Adam Lanza's Mother had been a gunowner, she could've stopped her son before he left the house.
oh.........wait a minute........
anon-8q9r
Posted: Mon, Dec 17 2012, 8:13 am EST
Post subject: It's too late to save shooting victims, but it's not too late for action
NEWTOWN, Conn. — Is it too soon after the latest slaughter of innocents to begin a conversation about gun control?
No, it’s too late.
It is too late for the 20 children, ages six and seven, shot to death with a rifle that had little use beyond killing people. Too late for the young men and women the little boys and girls called "Mommy" and "Daddy," for the older men and women they called "Grandma" or "Grandpa.’’
Too late because the children are dead and they are not coming back.
Too late, too, for the educators who died because this country cannot answer this question: How do we keep the 300 million guns circulating in this country out of the hands of people — mostly young men — who don’t see children as little boys and girls to be read to and sung to sleep at night and have their boo-boos kissed.
Who see them as soft, cuddly, little targets. Worthy sacrifices to the implacable demons in their heads.
"I don’t know — what can be done?’’ wailed Sharon Roodhuyzen, the wife of a Newtown teacher who was not harmed Friday. ``What can any one person do?"
http://blog.nj.com/njv_bob_braun/2012/12/braun_its_too_late_to_save_sho.html#incart_river_default