And people wonder why the US is so divided

[BIGREDIOWAN]

 

 

Why do you NEED guns?

 

Simple question. Why?

To protect myself, and my family.

 

 

The expected answer, and it has merit. But, in light of all the data showing a decline in violent crime, does that change your attitude about the necessity of a gun?

 

The data wouldn't help you if you were in your house and someone breaks into it and you have no way of protecting your family. It might make some feel warm and fuzzy, but it won't make the person trapped in a home invasion situation feel warm and fuzzy. My family is the most precious thing in my life, no one else matters, I should have the right, as others should too, to protect my family from a crazy bastard that breaks into my house no matter how slim that chance might be. Some dip$hit that had a mental breakdown and got dads guns shouldn't have the right to basically take my guns away because others failed to recognize the issues that individual was facing and found a way to deal with it. I don't go to the range on a daily basis, shoot off a bunch of rounds and scream "Murica" either. I'm a casual gun owner.................per se.

[Landlord]

What about that changes the culture in areas like Detroit? Is some 13 year old kid that is joining a gang going to give a rip about some advertisement telling him guns are dangerous? Heck, he already probably smokes a pack a day.

 

Meanwhile, look at all of the gun safety, hunter safety and conceal carry classes that teach law abiding citizens what the dangers are and how to avoid them.

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately federal dollars are pretty unequipped to handle this sort of approach. Gun control, like all law-based approaches to things, are meant to be preventative, not prescriptive. In a perfect world, or at least a better one, ordinary citizens are taking up the cause of improving the conditions and mentalities and support for their fellow citizens in these kinds of areas/environments, and that works as a marriage with reform on the law side of things to get progress made.

[BigRedBuster]

 

What about that changes the culture in areas like Detroit? Is some 13 year old kid that is joining a gang going to give a rip about some advertisement telling him guns are dangerous? Heck, he already probably smokes a pack a day.

 

Meanwhile, look at all of the gun safety, hunter safety and conceal carry classes that teach law abiding citizens what the dangers are and how to avoid them.

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately federal dollars are pretty unequipped to handle this sort of approach. Gun control, like all law-based approaches to things, are meant to be preventative, not prescriptive. In a perfect world, or at least a better one, ordinary citizens are taking up the cause of improving the conditions and mentalities and support for their fellow citizens in these kinds of areas/environments, and that works as a marriage with reform on the law side of things to get progress made.

 

Sooooo....more federal gun laws aren't going to improve the murder rates in the worst murder areas.

 

Isn't that what we are trying to fix? Or, is murder in those areas not a big deal....we just care about the, relatively speaking, small number of murders that happen in these very public displays of violence in neighborhoods more like what we live in.

[HuskerNation1]

This is a typical American political issue that both sides are F'ed up on.

 

Yes, there can be reasonable gun legislation that doesn't affect law abiding citizens. I really question the logistics of doing that. I think you could put the most strict gun laws in place and idiots are still going to have them. I guess it would make some people feel safer.

 

A really big issue in this though is a culture issue. And....once again....both sides are F'ed up on this issue.

 

Call me racist or whatever you want, but most gun violence is not in your middle class and rich neighborhoods. And, don't give me the crap that it's these poor poor people who have nothing else in life to do other than go around and shoot people. In these areas of the country, it is a cultural issue. When you have teenagers feeling like they need to be packing heat to either be cool, be a member of a gang or protect themselves from anyone else walking down the street, we have a major problem. Detroit tops the list of the most dangerous cities with 54.6 murders per 100,000 residents. Anyone who is associated with Detroit should be pathetically embarrassed by the culture that obviously is in that city. It needs cleaned up ASAP and that will take some very very strong police action. I know, nobody wants to say that because right now that's not politically correct. But, in other cities like Chicago and NYC where a mayor has gone in and actually gotten tough, the murder rate has gone down. Are Americans/liberals willing to allow stop and search laws in these areas? Oh...no...that would be racist (even though the murder rate might drop dramatically).

 

Now, before any right wingers start yelling...hell yeah....The right wing is just as F'ed up as anyone else. I have close friends who are totally convinced that Obama and the government is trying to take their guns away. So....guess what, they are stock piling their guns. Heck, they buy guns right and left and when I ask the why, they either chuckle and say...I don't know....or they give me some convoluted answer about buying them before they are illegal.

 

What a bunch of BS. As in anything politically in this country, look to see who benefits financially from the propaganda that is being put out. The NRA is flooding America with all this BS about the tyrannical government wanting to take our guns away and we need to fight back...and, oh BTW....go buy a gun. OK....who do you think the biggest donors to the NRA are? Don't you think that the gun and ammunition manufacturers are a major part of the NRA? Now....who benefits financially by creating an hysteria about the government taking our guns away and so everyone needs to go buy them?

 

This is one of the most amazing advertising/propaganda events in the world history and the gun and ammo manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank.

 

I am a gun owner and I use my guns for sport. Some of the best memories I will ever have of my son growing up is taking him hunting and it would be absolutely horrible if that would ever have to come to an end. I don't see that happening. Honestly, I have absolutely no clue how I would defend myself with any of the guns I have. Maybe if I knew ahead of time there was going to be an invasion and I had time to go to the closet and get my shotgun and load it and be ready....But, that's a pretty far fetched chance.

 

Once again, this is an issue that will never go away. The left will always cry for more gun laws and the right will always cry claiming the left wants to take our guns away. Meanwhile, the politicians and gun and ammo manufacturers are laughing at everyone else giving them this power.

 

BRB-I agree with you on most points, but I think the most important point is the recognition that gun violence is a cultural issue, and that is where the dialogue must begin. If both sides are still debating whether or not the weapon of choice to commit the crime is the issue, then the issue will never get resolved. We need to focus on what types of things would make someone want to commit such a crime.

 

And the entire point of this thread is that, with such a hot button issue like this, within hours of a horrific tragedy, this President chose to add fuel to the fire and push both sides of the debate to their corners, rather than trying to bring them together. Real leadership is about bringing opposing views together, and that is something this President is lacking. Someone made a great point that, if the POTUS really felt so strongly about gun control as he demonstrated last week in his rant, why didn't he pass such legislation in 2009/2010 when the Dems had all 3 branches of government?

[BigRedBuster]

That's fine as long as you're willing to acknowledge that culture issue goes both ways.

 

From your last paragraph I'm not sure you are.

[HuskerNation1]

That's fine as long as you're willing to acknowledge that culture issue goes both ways.

 

From your last paragraph I'm not sure you are.

 

I'm not talking about the culture of the politics of the gun violence debate, but our societal culture overall. I do agree both sides need to come together and have a respectful discourse, but that is hard to do when the ultimate leader of this nation is deepening the divide. Here is what Obama should do if he wanted to be an effective leader.

 

1. Allow several days to go by to let the family members and friends mourn the loss.

2. Put together a summit (or whatever you want to call it) from both parties in the coming weeks

3. Have the debate scheduled on television so the process is open and transparent, and all Americans can hear what both sides are saying.

4. Determine what common ground is out there, and act on that initially, but state that the dialogue is just a starting point.

 

A real leader doesn't play to his or her special interests or party but pulls people together to tackle the core of an issue. Because of Obama's anger rant last Thursday, the two sides in this debate are even further apart now than they were prior to the shooting. That is not what I expect out of the POTUS, whether its a Dem or Republican.

[BigRedBuster]

Well, when are you going to do your part in changing the culture instead of pointing fingers at the other side?

[HuskerNation1]

Well, when are you going to do your part in changing the culture instead of pointing fingers at the other side?

 

If I were just offering criticism, your point would be valid. But I explained why I was critical, and offered a step by step approach to how the situation could have been handled better.

[BigRedBuster]

No...all you did was be critical of the President because he wasn't critical of the people in ferguson. (Which may every valid). But,should he also be critical of the NRA, gun industry and people like the idiots that took their guns to Nevada to "defend" an idiot rancher that was breaking the law?

[HuskerNation1]

No...all you did was be critical of the President because he wasn't critical of the people in ferguson. (Which may every valid). But,should he also be critical of the NRA, gun industry and people like the idiots that took their guns to Nevada to "defend" an idiot rancher that was breaking the law?

Did you read the entire thread? This thread was very specific to the timing of Obama's comments hours after the tragedy and the divisive nature of his rhetoric. I offered a very specific explanation of what he could have said to set the tone for a respectful discourse on this topic, and just explained a multi-step approach I would have taken as a leader to bring the opposing sides together. I deal with opposing views all the time as a leader at my organization and certainly do not condone the approach he took.

 

Do you approve of his comments last Thursday...both the timing and tone of them?

[Decked]

I'm curious (if anybody has the statistics), how many deaths last year by guns were a direct result of violent gun crimes involving gangs compared to school shootings.

[NebraskaHarry]

Why do you NEED guns?

 

Simple question. Why?

Uh, zombies. Duh.

[BigRedBuster]

 

No...all you did was be critical of the President because he wasn't critical of the people in ferguson. (Which may every valid). But,should he also be critical of the NRA, gun industry and people like the idiots that took their guns to Nevada to "defend" an idiot rancher that was breaking the law?

Did you read the entire thread? This thread was very specific to the timing of Obama's comments hours after the tragedy and the divisive nature of his rhetoric. I offered a very specific explanation of what he could have said to set the tone for a respectful discourse on this topic, and just explained a multi-step approach I would have taken as a leader to bring the opposing sides together. I deal with opposing views all the time as a leader at my organization and certainly do not condone the approach he took.

 

Do you approve of his comments last Thursday...both the timing and tone of them?

I said in my post your complaints may be very valid.

 

Do you think complaining about the president is going to fix the problem?

[walksalone]

 

 

Why do you NEED guns?

 

Simple question. Why?

To protect myself, and my family.

 

 

The expected answer, and it has merit. But, in light of all the data showing a decline in violent crime, does that change your attitude about the necessity of a gun?

 

 

So, living in "the hood", where violent crime has increased because they've laid off half the police force 3 years ago, I have NO reason to have a gun?

[knapplc]

 

Why do you NEED guns?

 

Simple question. Why?

Uh, zombies. Duh.

 

 

OK, valid point.