It wasn’t too surprising that the House Appropriations Committee defeated attempts Thursday to remove the 2003 Tiahrt amendment restricting access to federal gun data. The gun lobby has great influence in Washington, D.C., even with the Democratic takeover of Congress. But at least the committee approved language clarifying that police could access the data, which 225 mayors and 34 police organizations said was important in fighting crime and protecting cops.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Monkeyhawk on Let immigrants run
- Chrisfrommactown on Let immigrants run
- BlueJay on Let immigrants run
- Monkeyhawk on Too many exemptions
- JWink on Too many exemptions
- LonnythePlumber on Jail consultants straining patience
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
98 Comments
The NRA claims it’s an advocate for constitutional rights but, in fact, it is a lobbying organization for gun manufacturers.
The NRA will aquiesce to any number of limitations of 2nd Amendment rights, so long as they can sell guns.
Twenty years ago, the NRA said it opposed gun-owner registration, but to sell more guns they accepted Concealed Carry provisions that put virtually ever gun-owner into government data bases.
In the real world, if you carry a gun, you’re considered a certified nut. Get stopped on Kellogg and the first question the traffic cop will ask you is if you have a weapon. If you do, he won’t ask to see your Concealed Carry permit, s/he’ll point a gun at you and consider you to be a threat to his/her life.
If you’re sitting in your Lazy-Boy recliner afraid of home invaders, unless you have a Glock locked and loaded on the end table, you are a victim of the NRA. Home invaders, as rare as they are, don’t regularly allow you to go to the gun safe and remove the trigger lock before they attack. What the hell. Keep your gun close at hand and tell the kids not to play with it. Yeah, that’ll work.
Guns are the Right Wingnut drug. If we are to believe that the vast majority of gun-owners are, in fact, law-abiding citizens no gun-control laws will infringe on their 2nd Amendment rights.
Law enforcement officers tend to deal with a minority of the population. Even if they know that you — a law-abiding citizen — have a gun, they should have the right to know who has guns. The “Tiahrt Amendment” denied them an essential tool for fighting crime.
If you’re not a criminal, it doesn’t affect you.
Deal with it.
MoneyHawk
“The “Tiahrt Amendment” denied them an essential tool for fighting crime.”
Flat out lie. The rest of your post is shear ignorance, or are you just a paid propogandist?
Moneyhawk
Take this statement for instance-”If we are to believe that the vast majority of gun-owners are, in fact, law-abiding citizens no gun-control laws will infringe on their 2nd Amendment rights. ”
So are you saying that if the government bans semi-auto shotguns it does not infringe on my rights?
Phillipe
What does this mean-”But at least the committee approved language clarifying that police could access the data”?
They always could, as part of a criminal investigation. That’s one of the big lies Bloomberg has been spreading, and people like you have been swallowing.
What’s wrong with MonkeyHawk’s rantings?
- not everyone gets stopped on Kellogg (most never do) and have a firearm on them or in their car.
- Unless you’ve been previous “home invaded” there is no need to paint such disastrous picture of an event. It could be that the Louisville slugger behind the door is all that’s needed.
- “If we are to believe that the vast majority of gun-owners are, in fact, law-abiding citizens no gun-control laws will infringe on their 2nd Amendment rights.”You have proof otherwise? Didn’t think so. I would say Hank,Nathan, GMC and others on the Blog are law abiding citizens.
- Evidently MonkeyHawk never read the article.”"To allow this information to be misused by trial lawyers and gun control groups who want to sue gun manufacturers because criminals misused legally made and legally sold guns is not only bad policy but bad politics,” said Chris W. Cox, the NRA’s top lobbyist.”
Also from the article, “Pro-gun rights Democrats teamed with House Republicans on Thursday to block local governments and law enforcement agencies from gaining routine access to gun-purchasing data.”
That’s right MonkeyHawk – both sides of the aisle kicked the dog crap out of your anti second amendment stance.
Go lick your wounds now.
Great. The NRA has more clout with Congress than all of those demos and reps put together. Who needs congress anyway, us gun nuts can rule this country just fine. Sure, like we already do.
The People who don’t want the People to have guns have their reasons. Any argument can be made against anything, as the first poster has done.
Bloomberg’s New York City is in bed with the drug dealers and panders to them by telling its citizens to not fight back when being robbed, by just willingly giving-up the money.
Bloomberg also offers his addicts clean needles to keep them alive {dead drug-addicts don’t pay }.
When Mr. Getz, who had been repeatedly attacked robbed and beaten and had had enough was again attacked by four “muggers” { new name } he shot all four and he went to jail while the four “muggers” became millionaires after suing the City of New York. Their defense was that their sharpened screwdrivers were there to break-in to vending machines.
Addicts are Bloomberg’s customers.
It’s always the Communists, Fascists, organised crime, or traitors which want to disarm 300 million Americans, not law abiding citizens.
In Texas we used to have “shotgun squads” in Convenient Stores, but they’ve been outlawed and now those ladies get murdered for 20 bucks.
The most powerful Lobby in Washington is AIPAC who sucks billions out of the US Treasury.
The NRA sucks nothing, just protects the Second Amendment from traitors.
“Heckler” and “K A H N,” et al somehow don’t get the point of my original post.
The NRA has sold out your 2nd Amendment rights for no other reason than to sell more guns.
The 2nd Amendment says gun rights “shall not be infringed.”
Sorry, guys, but gun ownershipt has been infringed all to hell. Automatic weapons, sawed-off shotguns, a bureaucratic jungle to get a concealed-carry permit… just where was the NRA? Nowhere. At least as far as their proclaimed 2nd Amendment rights manefesto declares.
Nope. The NRA has sold out your constitutional rights simply so gun manufacturers can sell more guns.
“The NRA has more clout with Congress than all of those demos and reps put together.”
Hogwash. The NRA is nothing more or less than a voice for the 2nd amendment. They don’t even have a vote. Once again, the Lib Eagle hypes this as a sinister bill, but their Libs buddies didn’t stop it. The Eagle, sometimes, comes right to the edge of outright lieing to advance their agenda.
Fleettwood,
Let’s be honest about the NRA’s political power.
The NRA’s money translates directly into tv and radio ads, and direct mail campaigns, targeting any candidate who disagrees with them.
Nope. The NRA has sold out your constitutional rights simply so gun manufacturers can sell more guns.
Posted by: MonkeyHawk | July 13, 2007 at 07:54 AM
Really MonkeyHawk?
It’s your statement, now prove it.
You can’t can you, it’s just another arm flailing attempt because your impotence to describe any injustice here has failed.
Let’s be honest about the NRA’s political power.
The NRA’s money translates directly into tv and radio ads, and direct mail campaigns, targeting any candidate who disagrees with them.
Posted by: Tom | July 13, 2007 at 08:00 AM
Kind of like George Soros and his fundings and the elite left that fund Al Gore huh?
Bloomberg wanted to inundate gun-dealers with expensive frivolous lawsuits in order to drive them out of business.
Had it not been for the NRA, gun ownership would have been gutted more than it has.
One town down south { my country } made it against the law not to own a gun { just as a statement }.
“The NRA’s money translates directly into tv and radio ads, and direct mail campaigns, targeting any candidate who disagrees with them.”
So, you are saying that the people are too stupid to make up their own minds? If the NRA was all that bad, you would want them to be out there.
Fleettwood,
How do you get that out of what I typed??? What I typed was a statement of fact. “NRA” can be replaced in that sentence with “Moveon.org” or “NEA” or “National Right to Life Committee,” all special interest groups with real political power.
My comment was in response to your implication that NRA had no significant political influence, which is laughable given the facts of the money they have and how they spend it.
The Right needs the NRA, so they have a power base when the Right makes its move to take over the country by force, when the Democrats win the House, Senate, and White House in 2008…
I believe that IF the President declared Martial Law, all guns would have to be turned in to government(military) personnel…
Martial Law would suspend ALL Consdtitutional Rights… for everybody… in spite of the NRA
tom- I get your point. Some say the NRA have some in Congress in their pocket (or NEA, MoveOn etc.) and I don’t buy it. Telling a congressman that my organization has X number of members and this is how we think, is fair. The congressman can say bite me or not.
I believe that IF the President declared Martial Law, all guns would have to be turned in to government(military) personnel…
Posted by: Chas. | July 13, 2007 at 08:23 AM
That President would last about one day in office.
Special Interests having Members of Congress in their pockets??? Nawwww never happen… LOL
That kind of thinking is why Jack Abrahamoff thought would let him get away with his schemes…
KHAN — Thats almost funny, if it wasnt so bloomin’ sad…
I simply could not understand why the people advocating the elimination of the Tiahrt Amendment could not understand what it actually said. That it did not prevent legitimate law enforcement from accessing gun purchase records for criminal prosecution, or ever did! I have now come to the sad conclusion that it is not just a misunderstanding but a deliberate attempt to mislead for the political purpose of destroying the the second Amendment by those that depend on the 1st. Amendment for their livelihoods. Listening Randy? I got great delight with the statement, “At least committee clarified Tiahrt amendment”, ha. That sounds like a childish response to losing, yet trying to save face. The Tihart Amendment did not need clarifying, it simply needed reading by someone honest in reporting what it said. The NRA is about protecting the freedoms afforded by this country’s Constitution, and yes maybe protecting the lawful manufacture of products that when used lawfully provide much enjoyment and much good. Nothing wrong with that.
Mark, this is typical of what the Left does. It is explained to them in vivid detail what the purpose of the amendment does and does not do.
Then one day later the Left goes back on its revisionist history theme and it has to be explained all over again because of their belief in some fairy tale rather than the facts presented.
You will notice that the same arguments persist from the Left although they have been proven wrong millions of times. They simply revise history in their own warped way of thinking and hope people will believe them.
In other words, they lie constantly to win people over to their side.
The Democraps – Party of Liars.
I’m still waiting to see what happens to the CC laws, about the first time a street gunfight breaks out somewhere… LOL… I have a feeling that lots of states will repeal that law real fast…
My apologies to Randy, correction in order. The statement beginning this blog, “At least committee clarified Tiahrt amendment”, was by Phillip Brownlee. It just sounded so much like Randy I attributed it to him.
“about the first time a street gunfight breaks out somewhere…”
For years, the Eagle whined on about all the chaos that would ensue if Kansas got CC.Again, they tip toe up to the line of being liars.
The Right needs the NRA, so they have a power base when the Right makes its move to take over the country by force, when the Democrats win the House, Senate, and White House in 2008…
…Posted by: Chas. | July 13, 2007 at 08:23 AM
CHas–I know you are too smart to really believe that. Nice hyperbole though. Of course, I heard the same thing from the fringe right while Clinton was President.
L J — Just listen to the Right wingers on talk radio… I do think there are groups of them who might actually TRY to take over the country by force, if they dont get their way in 2008…
Shoot, Khan just posted that the President wouldnt last more than a day if he declared Martial Law… And I thought that was sort of a printed threat to the Presidency… But not sure…
Monkeyhawk:
“In the real world, if you carry a gun, you’re considered a certified nut. Get stopped on Kellogg and the first question the traffic cop will ask you is if you have a weapon. If you do, he won’t ask to see your Concealed Carry permit, s/he’ll point a gun at you and consider you to be a threat to his/her life.” -Monkeyhawk at 6:11.
Perhaps this statement reflects YOUR dealings with police, and if so, says volumes about you. However, having dealt with police daily, the “first” question they will ask will NOT be “do you have a weapon,” at least not on a routine traffic stop. And I GUARANTEE you that most officers do NOT consider a CC holder a “threat to their life.” On the contrary; they know the CC holder has no criminal record, and no history of violence. It is, in effect, a “good guy card.”
40+ states have “shall issue” CC laws. Are all of those citizens “certified nuts?” More important, has the parade of terribles so often cited occurred? No, and No.
Most officers carry daily, so understand completely why others may do so as well. I suppost that makes law enforcement “certified gun nuts?”
What you have displayed with that rant, Monkey, is your ignorance, not any insight. We have learned who is the “certified nut.” And, at least on this issue, it is you.
The Eagle has also displayed, once again, its penchant for dishonest reporting – heck, let’s say it – outright lieing on this issue. The original Tiahrt amendment did not stop local police from accessing trace data as part of a criminal investigation.
Read that last sentence again, Phil. Read the statute. Then tell me what Bloomberg’s real agenda was. It was NOT public safety. It was NOT assisting police in tracing guns. It was about sueing manufacturers and dealers. And has been pointed out before, that makes about as much sense as sueing fork makers for causing obesity.
Hopefully, this will put this carefully manufactured issue to bed, once and for all, and we will not have to continually refute the Eagle’s false reporting and outright prevarication. But as long as the Eagle continues to lie, we will continue to set the record straight. Don’t take my word for it; Max has posted the links (again! don’t you get tired of this BS, Max?). Read it for yourself.
So stuff it, Phil Brownlee. You lose.
Fleet… I’m sure you remember a few years back, when a “hockey dad” beat his kid’s coach to death, cause the kid didnt get to play as much as dad wanted him to??? Wonder what might have happened if the Dad would have had a CC permit??
Now hold on GMC… It makes about as much sense as a smoker suing a tobacco company too, but THAT seems to work just fine!!
Shoot, Khan just posted that the President wouldnt last more than a day if he declared Martial Law… And I thought that was sort of a printed threat to the Presidency… But not sure…
Posted by: Chas. | July 13, 2007 at 08:50 AM
Nice try Chas, but you presented a hypothetical and I answered it.
You’re pathetic attempt to reveal some sort of law violation is truly sad and shows the world the way your mind works or should i say doesn’t work in the way a reasonable human being’s mind should work.
Chas…he’d a been a LOT DEADER !!! Get real.
L J — Just listen to the Right wingers on talk radio… I do think there are groups of them who might actually TRY to take over the country by force, if they dont get their way in 2008…
Posted by: Chas. | July 13, 2007 at 08:50 AM
I off and on occassionally listen to a few. I have not yet heard one major right wing commentator talking about taking over the government by force. If they said it, it was sarcasm. Don’t be so freaking paranoid. It doesn;t become a man of your educaiton and intellect.
It is time for the hyperbole to stop. This countries problems will never be solved until reasoned men quit throwing bs, and start throwing reasoned ideals around like the loonies throw lies and paranoid schizophrenic hate filed bs. The real masters, of both parties, laugh as we attack each other, instead of them. The matrix is real
So, your hypothetical answer to my hypothetical scenario, is to Off the President??? And that isnt a hypothetical threat??
Telling a congressman that my organization has X number of members and this is how we think, is fair. The congressman can say bite me or not.
Posted by: fleettwood
In reality, the congressman isn’t going to say bite me or not – he/she will probably say ‘how much is it worth to you’ Power in Washington is based on greed and money – don’t forget that fact.
I’ve taken a few shots on this thread, but no one can argue that that the NRA isn’t a marketing arm of gun manufacturers.
Poor ol’ “K A H N” obviously didn’t read my original post. Every one of you who’s applied for a Concealed Carry permit is now part of a government data base. If — and it’s a pipe dream — the government were to set out to confiscate weapons, you’ve given them your name and address and they’ll get ya. All thanks to the NRA’s campaign to sell more guns.
If, in fact, the NRA really believed the 2nd Amendment granted the unfettered right to keep and bear arms — any kind of arms — they’d press a lawsuit that would inevitably end up before the Supreme Court. Even with the most conservative SCOTUS in generations, the NRA is unwilling to test the NRA’s stated position regarding the 2nd Amendment. Why don’t your NRA dues finance a true and final SCOTUS decision on the 2nd Amendment? Because the NRA is wrong. They know they’re wrong. And they’re making a fine living on you fools who think gun ownership is somehow a basic human right.
The 2nd Amendment is an 18th Century relic; as relevant to the 21st Century as the 3rd Amendment.
The army isn’t gonna try to quarter troops in you house; trust me. Not because it’s unconstitutional but because it’s simply irrelevant in the 21st Century. So-called “conservatives” who advocate “original intent” in constituional matters should come to grips that the 2nd Amendment says if you are a member of a well regulated militia you have the right to keep and bear a smooth-bore muzzle-loaded flintlock musket.
L J — I have lived in too many small communities in rural America, where there is a lot of talk at local lunch spots about taking over the government… and these guys get real serious about how they are going to do it… It was absolutely unbelievable how much they wanted to take Clinton out not too long ago…
In fact, in 2000, I was eating at a Truck Stop in New Mexico, and overheard a whole table of good ol’ boys talking about how they could take out Gore if he beat Bush in 2000… and these guys were very serious…
Also, I am not real sure that Michael Savage is being sarcastic or not… He openly states that ALL liberals need to be locked up in insane asylums, because they are ALL mentally unstable, and dangerous to Americans…
If that is sarcasm, then so be it, and I am wrong… But its not so much Savage that has to be a nut case, as some of his listeners…
Mark — Huh????
MonkeyHawk and Chas have now resorting to useless babble and arm flailing.
Nothing to see here, they lost and are now bitter.
Making up stories as fast as their lying minds can create.
“The Right needs the NRA, so they have a power base when the Right makes its move to take over the country by force, when the Democrats win the House, Senate, and White House in 2008…”
…Posted by: Chas. | July 13, 2007 at 08:23 AM
That is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read. And yes, Kahn’s right when he says that such a president would last about a day, if that, in office. As well it should be.
“Now hold on GMC… It makes about as much sense as a smoker suing a tobacco company too, but THAT seems to work just fine!!”
There’s a difference there, Chas, and you know it. The tobacco companies purposefully created and enhanced an addictive product, and lied about it, for years. It’s also the only product I know of that, used correctly and as intended, kills its user. Tobacco has NO meritorious use. While I’m not great fan of the tobacco litigation, it’s hardly in the same category as what Bloomberg proposes.
“when a “hockey dad” beat his kid’s coach to death, cause the kid didnt get to play as much as dad wanted him to??? Wonder what might have happened if the Dad would have had a CC permit??”
“I’m still waiting to see what happens to the CC laws, about the first time a street gunfight breaks out somewhere… LOL… I have a feeling that lots of states will repeal that law real fast…”
Don’t you think that “hockey dad” had issues – what makes you think he would have qualified for CC anyway? This is that “parade of terribles” I mentioned before. Note to Chas: 40+ states have “shall issue” CC laws, for some 15 years now. Just when has this happened? Never. What we know, in fact, is that CC holders commiting crimes with their carry weapon is all but unknown. It simply does not happen.
The libs have been waiting for the sky to fall for well over a decade, Chas. It ain’t falling; you can put away the umbrella. The scare tactics have been proven wrong again and again.
But you really know that, of course. You’re not stupid; you simply let your agenda dictate your “facts.”
Well, folks, I guess that — being a pacifist — I just get nervous with all of that fire power, and hardware floating around out in the open… I can understand protecting property when and if invaded… And I dont really have a problem with people owning guns… I just guess I dont see what possible need any body outside of military uniform needs owning assault rifles, and ouzi’s, and especially armor piercing ammunition…
In other words, I think maybe the NRA, or maybe its just some of its members, who seem to carry it to some extremes…
See, I have never owned a gun… I dont intend to ever own one… But, my neighbors on both sides of me own guns… And I am certainly not afraid of either of them…
However, I have lived in several areas where the Posse Commitatus is quite prevalent… I am scared of those folks… And I guess its those folks I worry about…
Chas.
i guess it could be, but I have been part of several small communites, rural communities. I have heard the same mouthing off. but if you were actually part of that commuity, you would know it was just that. Kinda like some of the crap that goes on here. Like I have seem all Republicans should be shot, tried for treason, hung, etc. It’s just talk. Also, I was quite aware of the militia movement here in Kansas a number of years ago. I personally knew several members, and were invited to join in. I declinded. However, in all their “serious talk” no discussion was ever held about overthrowing the government. Mostly, protection and self preservations should the government declare martial law and other things.THe Presidency, since many presidents ago, has had huge powers to not only declare martial law, but by executive decision, under a declared national emergency, to suspend nearly all rights.But you are right. there are alwasys a few real nut cases, on both sides. I recentlly heard on elderly gentleman declare that he wished someone would put a bullet in Bushes head. So, the right does not havea corner on zaniness.Michael Savage–Smetimes funny to listen to, but pushes the edge with his sarcasm. I believe that is exactly what it is.
GMC, as I remember the story about the hockey dad, he didnt have any issues… before that one day… he said he just snapped… He didnt plead temporary insanity… And I am sure if he had issues, his attorneys would have had him pleading insanity in a heartbeat…
Poor “K A H N.”
Poor, sad, deluded “K A H N.”
He has nothing to say so he spews out insults, as if they were somehow arguments or refutations.
He can’t deal with the facts of the issue so he resorts to lame ad hominems.
“Truth has a liberal bias.”
Monkeyhawk:
Parker v. DC. Look it up. ’nuff said.
And if you think the citizens holding weapons is “irrelevent” it this modern age, you simply haven’t been paying attention. The greatest threat to people, again and again, are governments, all over the world. That hasn’t happened here, in part, because our citizens retain the ability to stop it. It hasn’t come to that, and I’m not saying it is anywhere near there, nor am I advocating anything like that. Yet.
But 100 million+ armed citizens is a mighty deterrent. An armed person is a citizen, a disarmed one is a subject. Which do you wish to be?
L J – I heard about that elderly gent who wanted to shoot Bush… It was sad… But, what if it wasnt an elderly gent… but some 30-something?? By the way, I encountered those militia style groups BEFORE I started doing the Interim thing… So, I was a part of the communities… I also got invited to some meetings… I too, declined to attend… next morning, at coffee, I got all filled in…
Some of the guys I encountered were scared to death that Reagan was going to declare Martial Law, and try to stay on as President… They were very worried… They thought he was way to liberal for their liking… Which I thought was nearly laughable… But, it is a strange country!!
I just wish it didnt seem like the polarities were getting so much wider than they used to be…
“Some of the guys I encountered were scared to death”
My point exactly!
” just wish it didnt seem like the polarities were getting so much wider than they used to be… ”
Again, my point exactly. And the name calling, and the paranoia, and the hate that goes on on this blog by several posters, doesn;t move anything towards reconciliation
“But, it is a strange country!!”
Yes it is. A great and glorious experiement in self rule. May we be sensible and courageous enough to keep it
I just wish it didnt seem like the polarities were getting so much wider than they used to be…
Posted by: Chas. | July 13, 2007 at 09:26 AM
The only polarities that seem to be brought up are those by the left.
I agree L J…
KHAN-
While I respect your right to free speech, and have defended that right and all others in the military and elsewhere, you are deliberately the most annoying, most acrid individual on this blog. There are others that come to mind in the same light, but nowhere near to the heights that you take it. I realize that you once said this blog is “entertainment” but why don;t you just try being a decent human being for a change. The change could be good.
“GMC70″ –
If you really belive your pissant concealed weapon can defeat a modern 21st Century army hell-bent on quashing a citizens’ insurrection, you’re not worth arguing with.
I mean, isn’t that the logic behind George WMD Bush’s little Iraqi adventure?
But you miss the point (or, on purpose, have tried to change the subject.)
Why doesn’t the NRA fight for your right to keep and bear machine guns? Why doesn’t the NRA file suit and defend your right to keep and bear sawed-off shotguns? Why doesn’t the NRA go to the SCOTUS and prove once and for all that the 2nd Amendment means every American can and should own a firearm?
Here’s why: Because they’d LOSE!!!
It’s much easier to rouse the rabble and buy congressmen and sell the fantasy that your gun ownership might somehow fuel an insurrection against the government.
Good luck with that.
Show me where I have not been decent as you say LJ. Do you mean I lash out at those who lash out at me?
You bet, I’m not a spineless individual. You punch me, I’ll punch you right back with an even bigger fist.
Whenever I try to be reasonable – all I get is grief and ad hominem replies.
I’ve stop trying lf.
If you and others don’t like it, too bad – stop blogging or go somewhere else.
MonkeyHawk has lost the debate and now is using ridiculous embittered argument in place of reasoning.
Sad, but true folks – that’s the way the left does it.
LJ -
RE: your 9:40 post. I agree. However, Khan has company; it takes two, as the proverb goes, to tango. And while Khan may indeed be the chief instigator, he has willing co-participants in that endeavor.
We are all responsible for our own writing, no matter how much we may be responding to others, no matter what the perceived insult or attack may be. We’d do well to remember that. If you wouldn’t say it face to face, you shouldn’t write it here.
Show me where I have not been decent as you say LJ.
“the list is waaay too long”
“Do you mean I lash out at those who lash out at me?”
No, I mean you do it without provocation, just to stick yourfinger in the eye of your percieved enemy, the left
You punch me, I’ll punch you right back with an even bigger fist.
No. You believe in first strike
Whenever I try to be reasonable – all I get is grief and ad hominem replies.
Yeah sometimes. But you know what? Reasonable people don;t lash out like a dog with it’s tail stepped on. They persevere in their reaonableness
“If you and others don’t like it, too bad – stop blogging or go somewhere else.”
Sigh. You just don;t get it, do you?
Monkey:
Parker v. DC. ‘Nuff said. Look it up.
As to the rest, fine. Live as you choose. And the 2nd amendment will continue to serve as the silent deterrent that protects the rest of the Bill of Rights.
GMC70-
Yes indeed, There are others that can be and are frequently disagreeable. And I have told them that they were being disagreeable. But Khan, in the last few days, seems hellbent on taking it to a new level. I would like it to not go there.
Sorry LJ, but no one has appointed you Judge and Jury on my conduct.
I get daily remarks on the following:
- I’m on welfare- I lie about everything- I am disabled but still serve in Iraq- I’m not married, there must be something wrong with me
I could go on and on with the list, but just from today alone, all you have to do and go see the unprovoked remarks towards me.
I do get it LJ and I’m afraid you don’t.
If you mean that I’m a tough S.O.B that doesn’t take crap from people, then you better believe it. I’ll say it to anyone’s face as well if they continue to give me a line of crap.
If people talk to me in reasonable terms I return the favor.
LJ -
Agreed. Kahn is reaching for new lows. I hope some others, in responding, don’t follow him there, but instead choose to simply ignore his decent.
Oh I see how it works GMC. Let’s see counselor. Show me where I posted anything about cosmos today.
And this is the same post or similar that cosmos post on me daily.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/07/open-thread-713.html#comment-75793608
Sometimes several times a day and he is not the only one.
Poor ol’ “K A H N” –
He can’t deal with the facts, can’t grasp the realities, so he’s left with nothing but insults.
Your pathetic ad homs just don’t work anymore.
As if they ever did.
And just what are those facts and realities I can’t deal with MonkeyHawk?
Troll,
Thank you for posting my link that proves that you’re a liar and a hypocrite.
I’m glad to see that you believe in personal responsiblity.
“If people talk to me in reasonable terms I return the favor.
Posted by: ***K H A H N*** | July 13, 2007 at 09:58 AM”
Now that is real BS and everyone knows it.Care for me to repost some of your comments about me? Which you have repeatedly made in response to posts that were purely philosophical in nature and not directed to you.
If you are really concerned about the problems created by Khahn, write a short email of complaint to the editors. They have gotten rid of less offensive people than him in the past.
Did anyone else love Khahn’s parsing on the threat to rifle through Tom’s office? Khahn please tell us what the definition of “is” is…
Sure brian, repost your post and my reply. I also reserve the right to repost your reply.
Seems only fair right?
“If you are really concerned about the problems created by Khahn, write a short email of complaint to the editors. They have gotten rid of less offensive people than him in the past.”
Posted by: Steven Davis | July 13, 2007 at 10:47 AM
Please do Steven Davis. This oustering has been tried by the Fister group once or perhaps even more times as the Capn reported in very recently in a very bad mood after his failed attempt.
“Or are you chicken McFly?”
If you are really concerned about the problems created by Khahn, write a short email of complaint to the editors. They have gotten rid of less offensive people than him in the past.
Posted by: Steven Davis | July 13, 2007 at 10:47 AM
Steven Davis-
I am not so much concerned, as just tired of it. He has a right to say as he wishes, just as others have a right to denounce what he says. I believe in Free speech, in when it is diagreeable.It is just so damn boring, and then he becames the topic, once again. Just like now. I thought I would make an appeal to rationality. AN appeal that aparently fell on deaf ears. Oh well. I tried.
‘”4 dead in Ohio – Yeah, that got more press than the 50,000 + who died in Vietnam.Shows where the morality of the left lie – in the gutter.Posted by: ***K H A H N*** | July 12, 2007 at 12:29 PM ”
No, you are quite wrong. That shows how desensitized people had become to war violence. When the 49,976th person was killed it was no more newsworthy than the 49,947th.
It is not everyday that the National Guard kills Americans on a college campus, that is shocking and newsworthy.
Posted by: brian | July 12, 2007 at 01:11 PM ‘
‘Newsworthy eh Brian?That is how you classify our dead military as newsworthy?Shows everyone where your mind set is located.Posted by: ***K H A H N*** | July 12, 2007 at 01:16 PM’
‘F U KhahnPosted by: brian | July 12, 2007 at 01:16 PM ‘
LJ,Appreciate your efforts. I certainly believe in free speech, but threats to show up at people’s house, places of work – that goes beyond what should be tolerated here. The editors have an interest in people posting here and if some malcontents’ impede that, they have every right to ban them. So, I hope the Khahn keeps up his nonsense. That is all I want to say about him – because you are right, he gets fat and bloated off of any kind of attention. Kinda sad, really.
‘”Al Qaeda has shown themselves to be the limp organ of the Muslim persuasion. The fact they are hiding in the mountains of Pakistan demonstrates their impotence to influence outside of a 100 mile range.”Tell that to those killed in the 9/11 Trade Center attacks.Posted by: brian | July 12, 2007 at 01:49 PM’
‘Again there is brian leading the way by cheer-leading the deaths of others to prove his point. Perhaps brian seeks more press coverage on war dead so he can benefit from more Blog points.
Guess what Stumpy, five years and Al Qaeda has been held in check in Afghanistan. Their leaders are hiding, they have to live in holes and their money supply is dwindling. But I guess Stumpy wants to join the brian cheer-leading club on using deaths of others as their main talking points.
Posted by: ***K H A H N*** | July 12, 2007 at 02:55 PM’
So brian, point out what I said that was incorrect about you using “deaths” as the main focus of your talking points.
Do you deny bringing up “deaths” as the main focus of your talking points?
If you can’t defend it, why say it?
“If you are really concerned about the problems created by Khahn, write a short email of complaint to the editors. They have gotten rid of less offensive people than him in the past.
Posted by: Steven Davis | July 13, 2007 at 10:47 AM”
Regardless of my personal views on the value of what he posts on these blogs, I have no desire to have his freedom to share those views taken away.
Another perfectly good thread, gone to hell.
My point was that your statement “If people talk to me in reasonable terms I return the favor” is untrue.
Rather than rebut the content of what I, or others post, you most commonly chose to attack the posters themselves. Your comments target the character of the poster you are replying to, not the content of their message.
” I’ll say it to anyone’s face as well if they continue to give me a line of crap.”Posted by: ***K H A H N*** | July 13, 2007 at 09:58 AMLying coward. You don’t have the stones to face anybody.
Yes GMC70, I do get tired of the BS on gun control and the incessant, repetitive propaganda and lies the Wichita Eagle and most of the Free Press writes to attack the 2nd Amendment.
But as long as there are a few people like us who will be just as determined to defend the US Constitution, there is still hope to keep America free. Most people in this country take freedom for granted and can’t see what it takes to maintain the freedom that was gained through the sacrifice of those who gave their lives for this cause.
So, every time the Eagle or others, writes an article attacking the Constitution, I feel even more compelled to fight for Freedom, then they are to fight against it.
To those who have already read the Tiahrt Amendment, I apologize for the repetition. To those who cannot or care not to read the Tiahrt Amendment, yet criticize it anyway, I post the link below for your benefit.
Please note the Tiahrt Amendment is a 4-page document that requires a 6th grade reading level to comprehend. Though even the illegal immigrant janitor at the Wichita Eagle can read this document, I’m not sure all of the editors and writers of the Eagle can read and understand this document. (Even most posters on this blog should be able to read it, with a couple of exceptions I’m sure):
Even though this link is for the present law, and not the latest version from the House committee with the “clarifying language”, it is very clear from even the original law, that police can access gun trace data to investigate a specific crime.
For those who want to peruse gun purchase records for any other reason (like a Bloomberg witch hunt), that witch hunt is not allowed per both the Tiahrt amendment AND the 39 year-old Gun Control Act of 1968.
1)The Tiahrt amendment.http://www.house.gov/tiahrt/communications/press_releases/2007/Tiahrt_gun_amd/TIAHRT_amendment_2.pdf2)The Gun Control Act of 1968http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/gca.htm
For all the Anti-gun people –In order to get rid of all the gun happy nuts, you would have to get rid of the US military and Law enforcements.Think about it, who are these gun happy nuts and how is it that these people became so interested in having guns?
Come Now,
The reason that liberals and people like bloomberg want to take away our guns is simple. They fear that armed Americans might start taking matters into their own hands, and engage in a little Revolution. Also, the leftists don’t want angry rednecks, crackers, honkys and gringos gunning down their raping, looting, drug dealing, gang banging minority pets. No sir, the status quo must be maintained.
The Awful Price Of Not Being PreparedPosted on Tuesday, July 10 @ 00:10:00 EDT by cchumitaWhen you’re done reading this story, please send it to a friend!digg del.icio.us StumbleUpon Technorati
By Tim Inwood
I know many of you reading this are CCW license holders like me. If so, you probably have friends and family who think you are a little paranoid, if not crazy, for carrying a firearm. Sometimes this is out of ignorance and sometimes it is because they are hoplophobes: those souls with an irrational fear of firearms. Either way I am sure those with their license will at some point encounter these folks and have this conversation. You will find yourself up against the “sheep mindset”. They have a blind faith that all will be well, and if it is not the police will protect them. This wall built of obtuse bricks can be rather difficult to breach. The way to go about it is logic.
When asked to justify why I carry I always point out that, being an old Boy Scout, I try to live up to the motto “be prepared”. They will usually counter that you are so unlikely to be attacked it is not warranted to carry a firearm, or that if you are attacked you are better off submitting. At this point I say, “That might have been what Christopher Newsom and his girlfriend Channon Christian thought.” At this point they look at me with a puzzled expression. The Newsom-Christian murders did not get much, if any, news coverage nationally when it happened in January of this year, but it is a grisly example of what can happen to you if you are not prepared to defend yourself. This is, I must warn, a sad and horrible tale that only took place six months ago. The news media pretty much ignored this. There are many speculated reasons as to why, but I will leave it for you to decide why the networks did not wish to deal with this crime.
Click “Read More” for the entire articlehttp://www.buckeyefirearms.org/article3838.html
“write a short email of complaint to the editors.”
Why don’t you boycott? Go ahead.
Fleettwood,
You mean, succumb to threats of stalking and burglary? Stop posting because of attempts to intimidate?
I don’t think so.
However, I have lived in several areas where the Posse Commitatus is quite prevalent… I am scared of those folks… And I guess its those folks I worry about…
Posted by: Chas. | July 13, 2007 at 09:18 AM
Say Chas, your neighbors with guns, you do not fear. The Posse Comitatus you fear – you think the Posse Comitatus is us right-wingers?
Here’s what the Posse Comitatus Act is all about. It’s not about your neighbors taking over the government – it’s about the government taking over you and your neighbors.
The 2nd Amendment is here to make sure the Posse Comitatus from Government does not occur. The 2nd Amendent also affirms the right of the People to defend themselves.
The Libs want an all powerful Socialist Government with complete control over the people. Why do you think most Libs want to get rid of the guns? The Libs can’t force 50% of the people to continue supporting the other 50% of the people forever. That’s SOCIALISM.
Only if the People have NO power, can the Libs force SOCIALISM to continue forever.
The Libs don’t TRUST the people to have guns. Do you? Funny, you trust your neighbors with guns, but you don’t trust your neighbors neighbors with guns.
The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction. The Act was intended to prohibit Federal troops from supervising elections in former Confederate states. It generally prohibits Federal military personnel and units of the United States National Guard under Federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act substantially limit the powers of the Federal government to use the military for law enforcement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act
Jonas, tragic news story you posted above. Strange how this did not make national news.
One quote from your website I think is very revelant to this discussion:
“Frankly if the politicians were not intent on doing things that they think would cause us to revolt, they would have nothing to fear. Yet many elected officials are intent on tyranny.”
That is the very heart, in my opinion, of why the Libs want to ban guns.
“Stop posting because of attempts to intimidate?”
Mountain meet Molehill
Fleetwood, we disagree with you. You must discontinue posting now, because some of the others are starting to cry.
On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs – Dave GrossmanBy LTC (RET) Dave Grossman, author of “On Killing.”
Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost. In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always,even death itself. The question remains: What is worth defending? What is worth dying for? What is worth living for? – William J. Bennett – in a lecture to the United States Naval Academy November 24, 1997
One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me:
“Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident.” This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.
Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.
I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin’s egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful.? For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.
“Then there are the wolves,” the old war veteran said, “and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy.” Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.
“Then there are sheepdogs,” he went on, “and I’m a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf.”
If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero’s path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed
Let me expand on this old soldier’s excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids’ schools.
But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid’s school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep’s only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.
The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.
Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn’t tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, “Baa.”
Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.
The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.
Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?
Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.
Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, “Thank God I wasn’t on one of those planes.” The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, “Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference.” When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.
There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population. There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.
Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I’m proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.
Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, “Let’s roll,” which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers – athletes, business people and parents. — from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.
There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. – Edmund Burke
Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn’t have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision.
If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior’s path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.
For example, many officers carry their weapons in church.? They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs.? Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to massacre you and your loved ones.
I was training a group of police officers in Texas, and during the break, one officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other cop replied, “I will never be caught without my gun in church.” I asked why he felt so strongly about this, and he told me about a cop he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual came into the church and opened fire, gunning down fourteen people. He said that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy’s body and wait to die. That cop looked me in the eye and said, “Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?”
Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and would probably scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for “heads to roll” if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids’ school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them.
Their only response to the wolf, though, is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, “Do you have and idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones attacked and killed, and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?”
It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up.
Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: you didn’t bring your gun, you didn’t train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by your fear helplessness and horror at your moment of truth.
Gavin de Becker puts it like this in Fear Less, his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation: “…denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn’t so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling.”
Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level.
And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes. If you are warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be “on” 24/7, for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself…
“Baa.”
This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.
“Regardless of my personal views on the value of what he posts on these blogs, I have no desire to have his freedom to share those views taken away.”
brian,stiffling “views” is not what we’re talking about here. The eds have deleted his posts where he threatened to rifle through another poster’s office when he would not be there. To me this is markedly different content than his “views” – Such as they are, his nor fleetie’s, views are taken seriously by anyone with a cerebral cortex. I hate feeding the bloated troll, but thought the above distinction was an important one to make.
Hank,
I think Nathan posted sheep/sheepdog story one time before.
I think it is interesting that you guys are familiar with Dave Grossman. Did you know that he is the hero of some pacifist grouops? He has been very vocal against first person shooter video games – Grossman claims they use the same desensitizing techniques that the military has in getting soldiers to fire their weapons. The gaming community hates him.
I have read statistics about how many WWII vets died simply by failing to fire their weapon – it was an unbelievably high number. People like Grossman have helped reduce that percentage in subsequent wars.
Grossman’s web site:
http://www.killology.com/
Steven,
I do know about Grossmans dislike for FPS games.
I like his work regarding killing.
I could probably agree that FPS games do help desensitize kids to killing too.
However, the degree to which I think those FPS games do this is no different that any other “violent” entertainment in our society.
I don’t see these games as causing much of anything.
I will go into it more if you want, but I am pressed for time at the moment.
We can all rejoice, at least those that are sane.On Thursday, July 12, the U.S. House Appropriations Committee voted to protect language commonly known as the Tiahrt Amendment, rejecting two separate amendments designed to strike and gut the language, in the Commerce, Justice, and Science appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2008. This language maintains firearm trace information within the law enforcement community and out of the hands of politicians, trial lawyers and special interest groups.
“I don’t see these games as causing much of anything.
“I will go into it more if you want, but I am pressed for time at the moment.”
I don’t know if those games cause any problems either. I think the Columbine shooters played them a lot, but I think there was more going on with espicially Eric Harris than video games.
http://www.slate.com/id/2099203/I recently read that Eric Harris was from Wichita. I don’t think I knew that before.
Steven,
With things like this I think I have to demand more of a causal relationship.
There are millions of copies of FPS shooters sold each year.
I don’t even begin to know how many kids are playing these games.
What I do know is that if they were the cause or contributing factor (In a significant way) there should be much much much more violence or killing by those who play them.
Lets not forget that American kids are not the only ones playing them.
FPS games are a big hit in Asian countries like Japan and South Korea as well.
European kids are playing them to.
I don’t think you see anywhere near the same type of violence level in comparison to kids in these other countries ( I could be wrong)
What I am saying is that these games are not the problem.
Lack of instilling values or control by parents is probably the problem.
I have been playing violent video games for as long as I can remember.
I turned out ok…. :~)
Nathan,
I don’t think we are in disagreement on this. I was just mentioning earlier that the guy your dad pasted, and the same guy I think you cut & pasted earlier, was an opponent to first person shooter games. I am unfamiliar with what any scientific research says about their contribution to violence.