toldailytopic: Shooting at the Arizona Safeway. How could we help prevent tragic even

Status
Not open for further replies.

Todah

New member
Pass a law that requires that all citizens twenty years old and upward must carry a loaded firearm and at least 20 rounds of amunition whenever they are not in their home. This solution will make for a safer and freer country.


A friend of mine lived in Switzerland for a couple of years. She said, just about every adult there has a gun. I was reading up on their gun laws and requirements. I think that there policies are quite sane, responsible and practical.

One "saying" they have is; that the Swiss don't have an army, they are an army. Just about everyone is required to serve throughout their adult life, but for rather short time periods, but with continuous training, throughout their lives.

You are more or less required to have a gun, except if you are a felon, and unless you are mentally unstable.

To answer the daily topic question, I would concur with genuineoriginal, and say the best way to help prevent these tragedies, would be to require every individual to carry a gun.

To do that we should begin to adopt the Swiss method, and require all adults to be part of the National Guard, in essence, and learn, to use weapons safely. At the same time the ones with mental problems would be tested, and weeded out.

Not a perfect system, but it works well in a small country like Switzerland where most of the power resides in the hands of the local governments, and citizenry.

As most of us conservatives understand, the major problem with the USA is the gigantic, powerful, and over-reaching, federal government, and to a lesser degree, the state governments.

I think most government decisions involving everyday life, should be at the county and city levels.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Would that make things better or worse? Consider. Now you have a lot of people carrying guns. A person who gets angry about something might grab their gun and point it at somebody. Everybody else grabs their guns and then somebody misfires. When the bullets have finished flying, are more people dead than may have been if that one angry person had only been able to yell rather than grab a gun.

There was a period in American history where a large percentage of the population did openly carry fire arms and there is a reason why that is no longer allowed.

Good point. Add alcohol into the mix and you've got a potential recipe for disaster. :plain:
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Never heard of her.

:rotfl: You are a blind fool.

From those that knew him closely....
"As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal and oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy." - Caitie Parker

I've not heard of her either but frankly this apportioning or even implying 'blame' of any sort to this nut's 'politics' is just absurd. If I hear of something like this my first thought isn't that the perp is a liberal or conservative but rather they're a psychopathic killer who's gone nuts, end of. I think it's pathetic to bring politics or 'sides' into it when it's simply a case of a madman killing innocent people. :plain:
 

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
I don't think that guns (either banning them or forcing everyone to carry them) are the answer. They're simply a non-issue. If everybody had guns, but nobody wanted to kill anyone, then nobody would get shot (except, perhaps, accidently or something like that). If nobody had guns, but people still wanted to kill other people, I assure you, they'd find a way without guns.

If you want to prevent violent crime, then you have to get rid of its motivations, and that tends to be stuff like poverty and a lack of education, feelings of social isolation, etc.

We very seriously could cut down on crime...by making sure that everyone (without exception) has a certain quality of life, and this can be done through welfare programs, minimum wage laws, etc. I also think that the government fully should fund secondary education.

When people get relegated to the back burners of society, that's when violent crimes happen. Just look at the guy's background: wiki link.
 

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
I don't think that guns (either banning them or forcing everyone to carry them) are the answer. They're simply a non-issue. If everybody had guns, but nobody wanted to kill anyone, then nobody would get shot (except, perhaps, accidently or something like that). If nobody had guns, but people still wanted to kill other people, I assure you, they'd find a way without guns.

If you want to prevent violent crime, then you have to get rid of its motivations, and that tends to be stuff like poverty and a lack of education, feelings of social isolation, etc.

We very seriously could cut down on crime...by making sure that everyone (without exception) has a certain quality of life, and this can be done through welfare programs, minimum wage laws, etc. I also think that the government fully should fund secondary education.

When people get relegated to the back burners of society, that's when violent crimes happen. Just look at the guy's background: wiki link.

The things you outline may have some impact Trad....but I don't think they will have as much as you think. A nut is a nut no matter what his socio-economic position. Out of all the things you outline I can only see increased awareness of mental health issues and increased opportunites for treatment as having any real impact. Even then it will still be nominal. Nuts don't usually seek treatment because.....well, they're nuts. :idunno:
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Yet it turns out the guy was a flaming lefty so blaming Palin is obviously in error.

You might want to be cautious about that. This guy was an admirer of Hitler. He wanted to bring back the gold standard.

Here's one of his rants:
One video consists of a mix of delusional rants and harrowing warnings. After explaining his opposition to what he calls “treasonous laws,” his written text says, “In conclusion, reading the second United States Constitution, I can’t trust the current government because of the ramifications: The government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar.” He continues, “No! I won’t pay debt with a currency that’s not backed by gold and silver! No! I won’t trust in God!”

If you think that's the talk of a leftist, then we've located the problem.

jesse-kelly-giffords-m16-event.jpg


BTW, something good may be coming out of this. I see republicans and their surrogate organizations are now starting to say they're going to tone down the references to violence.

And that's a good thing for America.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Calling him a "liberal" or "conservative" is pretty misleading. His opinions, such as they were, seem to be all over the map. Even if he were an NRA member or a dyed in the wool Marxist, what possible difference would that make?
 

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
we could give up

our right to own guns
our free speech
and
even our religion

it may not work
but
we have to start somewhere
 

This Charming Manc

Well-known member
Tomo,

Your usually brighter than a this. the link between mental health issues and poverty is cylic.

People are poor and on the outside of society because they are nutts, people who are nuts tend to become poor and on the outside of society.

We could make a good imapct on mental health issues by a stonger, more caring more inclusive society. Diagnosis and health care are factors, but so are

  1. unemployemnt
  2. drug abuse
  3. time in prison
  4. poor parenting
  5. homelessness
  6. abuse of various forms
  7. social exlusion
  8. relational breakdown/divorce
  9. being a victim of crime
  10. tradgey and trauma

Ok some people are just a little loopy, some people suffer many of these things in life and remian mentaly intact, but deal with these issues better and we will see a marked improvement in a socities mental health.

I think tradio is one of the few epople whio is posing brighter since i got back.

The things you outline may have some impact Trad....but I don't think they will have as much as you think. A nut is a nut no matter what his socio-economic position. Out of all the things you outline I can only see increased awareness of mental health issues and increased opportunites for treatment as having any real impact. Even then it will still be nominal. Nuts don't usually seek treatment because.....well, they're nuts. :idunno:

 

genuineoriginal

New member
A friend of mine lived in Switzerland for a couple of years. She said, just about every adult there has a gun. I was reading up on their gun laws and requirements. I think that there policies are quite sane, responsible and practical.

One "saying" they have is; that the Swiss don't have an army, they are an army. Just about everyone is required to serve throughout their adult life, but for rather short time periods, but with continuous training, throughout their lives.

You are more or less required to have a gun, except if you are a felon, and unless you are mentally unstable.

To answer the daily topic question, I would concur with genuineoriginal, and say the best way to help prevent these tragedies, would be to require every individual to carry a gun.

To do that we should begin to adopt the Swiss method, and require all adults to be part of the National Guard, in essence, and learn, to use weapons safely. At the same time the ones with mental problems would be tested, and weeded out.

Not a perfect system, but it works well in a small country like Switzerland where most of the power resides in the hands of the local governments, and citizenry.

As most of us conservatives understand, the major problem with the USA is the gigantic, powerful, and over-reaching, federal government, and to a lesser degree, the state governments.

I think most government decisions involving everyday life, should be at the county and city levels.

I based my suggestion on what I learned when I studied Switzerland for a high-school report many years ago.
 

This Charming Manc

Well-known member
hmm you should of studied harder.

There a strong restriction on carrying guns in switzerland!

An army issue rifle stored at home and used for national service is very different that a personal, pistol owned by the individual and carried on their person for personal saftey.

The resaerch wasnt hard to do

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

So can we put this gun nuts wet dream to bed now? (worried about his mixed metaphores)

I based my suggestion on what I learned when I studied Switzerland for a high-school report many years ago.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
hmm you should of studied harder.

There a strong restriction on carrying guns in switzerland!

An army issue rifle stored at home and used for national service is very different that a personal, pistol owned by the individual and carried on their person for personal saftey.

The resaerch wasnt hard to do

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

So can we put this gun nuts wet dream to bed now? (worried about his mixed metaphores)

I said I based it on the information, not that I copied it from the information.
An army issue rifle stored at home would have had no effect on the shooting in a public store. Only firearms carried on the person would have an effect.
I have no problem with having both a personal firearm carried at all times and a rifle stored at home.

Thanks for the suggestion.
 
I'll open up just by saying anything we do to make any other such events less likley will mean someone somewhere will loose some rights.

I'd would argue for much tighter gun control, because the altrenative is tighter people control, which to my mind is a greater price to pay.

i dont know much about the incident cuz dont watch TV but anyhow... i heard somewhere that the perp was a left-winger.. not sure this is true?

but if it was, i cant help the thought i had: maybe the Left staged this so as to make everyone think we need tighter gun control laws?

just a paranoid thought... but i am not paranoid for nothing... (long story what all i mean... Suffice it to say, I've seen a few things in my lifetime... )

anyway, as the saying goes "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns"

the gov't is already too big and out of control... and we are hardly a democracy anymore... or republic or whatever..

we can't lose our right to bear arms..

it is the right to defend ourselves against our enemies..

i think we should work on improving mental health.. but that is tricky because.. my opinion on how to improve ment health is likely very different from everyone else's..

my remedy for bad mental health is to spend time with Jesus in the Real Presence in the Catholic Church (in total silence)... but most people (even Catholics) dont do that...

which is why we as a society.. have nut cases galore...
 

Caino

BANNED
Banned
If dynamite requires regulation, driving a car, a truck, chemicals and all sorts of other powerful things, why not have the same strict controls on guns?




"If one man craves freedom — liberty — he must remember that all other men long for the same freedom. Groups of such liberty-loving mortals cannot live together in peace without becoming subservient to such laws, rules, and regulations as will grant each person the same degree of freedom while at the same time safeguarding an equal degree of freedom for all of his fellow mortals. If one man is to be absolutely free, then another must become an absolute slave. And the relative nature of freedom is true socially, economically, and politically. Freedom is the gift of civilization made possible by the enforcement of LAW." Uranta Book 1955


caino
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top