Advice to parents on school options

SpaceNut · 2018-11-03 17:26:48

again this time at a Hot yoga gunman Scott Paul Beierle had prior arrests for touching women

Scott Paul Beierle, 40, killed two women in a Tallahassee studio and wounded five other people before turning the gun on himself

gee saved the expense of a trial...

SpaceNut · 2018-11-04 18:14:26

President Donald Trump has repeatedly refused to accept any responsibility for inciting violence in American communities, 'No Blame'? ABC News finds 17 cases invoking 'Trump' in connection with violence, threats or alleged assaults with rhetoric as seen as the potential source of inspiration for some citizens acting on bigoted beliefs.

Starting in AUGUST 19, 2015 as a candidate Trump has been the voice to which 17 criminal cases where Trump's name was invoked in direct connection with violent acts, threats of violence, or allegations of assault. These 17 cases are mostly white men, as young as teenagers and as old as 68, while the victims represent an array of minority groups — African-Americans, Latinos, Muslims and gay men.
Each voicing that Trump told me to do it that I only followed what Trump says that he does...

elderflower · 2018-11-05 05:55:17

Trump may or may not be the arsonist, but he is culpable in that he is at least fanning the flames. That goes for his analogues around the world (Britain, Brazil, Sweden, France, Germany, Israel etc etc.)

GW Johnson · 2018-11-05 10:21:20

Most states have laws against "incitement to riot" or similar. As usual, the rich and powerful are not called to account for what they say. Money talks, way too loudly. Ordinary folks get sent to jail for this.

As for arming targets, there are perfectly-good reasons to have gun free zones. What has been forgotten for about a century is that once you declare a gun-free zone, you are obligated to adequately defend it. We don't defend them adequately, which is why these zones have become sitting-duck targets that draw crazies with guns and bombs, and terrorists with guns and bombs.

Crazies legally getting guns is a far bigger leak in our current laws than any gun show exception ever could be. It's based on a court committing a crazy to an institution, as a go/no-go item. That's a money-maker for lawyers and judges, so they don't want it changed by any sort of "red flag" approaches. Follow the money.

Most of the rest of "the usual" gun control ideas pale into insignificance, compared to the potential effects of properly dealing with (1) undefended gun-free zones, and (2) crazies legally getting guns. Politically inconvenient, but fact.

GW

SpaceNut · 2018-11-05 18:22:26

Not the cause of the mass shootings or the crazy inciting of the actions but some will question the right to conceal.

Supreme Court turns away challenge to California gun control

I think the issues is one that only those that should have it concealed need to be minimized and all others do need to display it out in the open with all proper safety devices used.

SpaceNut · 2018-11-08 19:28:01

Another senseless gun attack. Thousand Oaks shooting leaves 13 people dead, including gunman, and 18 injured.

Thousand Oaks Bar Shooting

A hooded gunman dressed in black reportedly tossed smoke bombs into a Thousand Oaks country dance bar and opened fire, killing 12 people, including Ventura County Sheriff's ...
The Thousand Oaks shooting is the eighth mass shooting in the U.S. this year in which four or more victims died.
A former U.S. Marine machine gunner who may have suffered from post-traumatic stress was said to have been cleared of any issue recently.

kbd512 · 2018-11-08 20:35:00

We should post "No Murder Zone" signs everywhere. That should prevent people from committing murder. If anyone else is cognizant of the absurdity of that idea, then maybe you understand the problem. If not, keep extolling the virtue of disarming more victims. It's worked so well thus far. Incidentally, the criminals and the crazies don't care about signage and virtue signaling.

California recently passed laws that prevent their citizens from carrying openly or concealed in public. That's what the challenge to the law is actually about. Their citizens have no legal means to defend themselves in public using a firearm because they're prevented by law from carrying a firearm openly or concealed.

SpaceNut · 2018-11-08 20:43:10

The criminals, those mentally insane do not even care about others that are carrying guns and sure as well are not concerned about few guards, the police our what the out come will be....

Its still all breaks down to mental health and control of emotions....

kbd512 · 2018-11-08 21:56:15

SpaceNut,

It's not a matter of what criminal or criminally insane people care about. This is not about anyone's feelings. If everyone around the criminals has equivalent means to defend themselves against acts of violence as criminals have means to commit acts of violence, whether or not they choose to act out in a violent manner has little bearing on the ability of those around them to stop a criminal assault with equivalent force.

The all but non-existent mental health care system in our country is well and truly broken. It's past time to remedy that, but we'll have to drag members of both political parties kicking and screaming to the negotiating table for them to actually pass legislation that adequately addresses mental health care. Anyone that a court adjudicates is a threat to themselves or others, after appropriate psychiatric evaluation, should not have weapons of any kind.

SpaceNut · 2018-11-11 16:36:28

Even up here in little towns in NH We are not immune to guns violence. There is currently an active shooter that is pinned down in the woods between the local Walmart and a Tractor supply store along Rt11 heading north.

Several officers are still arriving to the scene, ya I did observe this. It is unknown if there are any casualities but it appears that the person had gone in and out of the walmart store only to flee on foot into the woods. Ongoing past 2 plus hours already. Fist referenced on Facebook of the wifes and friends which she keeps in touch with.

SpaceNut · 2018-11-12 10:03:51

Update:

As of last night they were intensifying the effort to capture 27-year-old Christopher L. Thomas. Where a manhunt that began Sunday forced the evacuation and closure of Walmart, Market Basket and other Route 11 area businesses. The man, armed with a rifle, was asked to leave Walmart by its security and after a verbal confrontation to bare arms fled, disappearing into the woods.

Just now in

Armed suspect in custody

SpaceNut · 2018-11-12 21:33:47

I have heard that posting guards with guns at any place will keep from having the massacres that have been happening. So what do you say when Black security guard is killed by police

Jemel Roberson, a legally armed security guard at a Chicago-area bar, was killed Sunday by an officer as he held down a gunman at his workplace. Jemel Roberson had apprehended an armed suspect outside the bar when at least one Midlothian police officer, responding to a report about gunfire, shot him. The security guard’s death shows that black men aren’t allowed to be the good guy with a gun.

I guess that its shot first and ask questions if they survive....

SpaceNut · 2018-11-19 17:57:48

Multiple people, including officer and shooter, wounded in Chicago Hospital Shooting

Sure seems like guards and officers are not enough

SpaceNut · 2019-05-19 06:11:18

Here is the topic for this content:

RobertDyck wrote:

288 and rising every day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s … ted_States

https://www.chds.us/ssdb/category/graphs/

The terrible numbers that grow with each mass shooting

Where we stand today

SpaceNut · 2019-05-23 17:01:11

Snip of post:

kbd512 wrote:

SpaceNut,
I know it must be terrible to the gun grabber's various arguments when their "facts and figures" are compared with other causes of child mortality, but it does put their entire line of argumentation into perspective by using the other mortality numbers that CDC very studiously compiles. The gun grabbers don't care at all about anyone's children, much less reducing the number of "gun deaths", and they never have. They're just another example of a fringe group within a specific political party with a similar unhealthy interest in trying to "control" other people by disarming them so that future unscrupulous political ideologues from that party can then commit mass murder without fear of reprisals from their subjects, and at rates that make those "dangerous guns in civilian hands" look quite tame by way of comparison.
Between 1999 and 2018, drownings not related to boating accidents were just over 67,000 (national average is ~3,532 per year vs 1,368 per year for guns). I think the boating accidents only add something like 300 to 350 to the drownings figure. During that same time frame, guns were responsible for killing around 26,000 children. So far as I'm aware, there's no national campaign to ban pools and hot tubs. Then again, why would there be? We very clearly don't care about children and never have. So, why is it that we should care about something that killed half as many people as backyard swimming pools and hot tubs?
As long as the gun grabbers' line of argumentation involves taking things from people who have never committed any crimes, then I'm going to point out what's so obvious to me, as someone who comes down on the other side of this issue. It's just another government-sponsored theft, and at gunpoint no less, as if there wasn't already enough irony involved from people purporting to want to stop violence.
When those here who claim to care about children also demand action against people with pools and hot tubs, then I'll believe that they care at all about children. I already know that they won't because they don't. Nobody "needs" a pool in their back yard. Sound familiar? It does to me. Until I see the people demanding legislative action to stop something that results in the deaths of twice as many kids per year, I won't believe that they're after our guns for anything other than nefarious or even criminal purposes.

kbd512 wrote:

Josh,
Did you have to go through a FBI background check to get a driver's license or buy a car?
Was there any possibility of going to federal prison if you didn't pass the background check?

JoshNH4H wrote:

I ask this as someone who genuinely does not know:
Under what circumstances could failing the NICS background check result in a person going to prison? Are there any recorded cases of this happening?

SpaceNut · 2019-05-23 17:04:37

kbd512 wrote:

Josh,
Ask and ye shall receive:
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives - Pittsburgh Man Sentenced to Prison for Falsifying Firearms Purchase Forms
If one example from the BATFE's own website isn't enough, just let me know. There's a whole lot more where that came from.
Use your Google-fu and search for "man goes to prison for falsifying firearms purchase forms". Perhaps you'll make it through all the cases sometime during your 10th reincarnation.
One of the few good things that AG Sessions did when he was in office, unlike AG Holder or AG Lynch, was to begin seriously cracking down on federal firearms violations referred to the US DoJ for prosecution.
Federal Gun Prosecutions Up 23 Percent After Sessions Memo
Any more questions about the NICS check?

It can and does if you purposely enter false data....

Terraformer wrote:

I don't think "falsified forms" is quite the same as "failed a background check".

JoshNH4H wrote:

Maybe I'm wrong about this but I bet it says right on the form that lying is a federal crime, punishable by (whatever the penalties are) under U.S.C. (legal designation whatever).
Then I'm sure there's also classes of people who fail their background check because they have outstanding bench warrants against them or are otherwise on the run from the law--people who shouldn't be able to purchase guns and people who ought to comply with their warrants. Sure, it's extremely dumb to submit personally identifying forms to the FBI if you're a fugitive from the law, but in a nation of 325 million there's plenty of dumb criminals out there.
If it were the case that it was a federal crime for someone to try to buy a gun who doesn't pass a background check, I would be against that since there's no way to find out if you can legally try to buy the gun without trying to buy the gun. I don't think that's how this law works, though.
I myself don't own a gun and have never really wanted to. I think it would probably be better if there were fewer guns in the country. The murder and suicide rates would probably be lower if it were harder to get machines designed to be effective at killing. Most murders are crimes of passion, and most people who attempt suicide and fail don't try again; there's not "good guys" and "bad guys" out there, really. I guess there are bad guys, but the good guys sometimes get angry or drunk too. No personal guns would be fine with me: I have no issue with the idea of repealing the second amendment, and if solid majorities of the country were on board I'd say let's go for it.
We live in a democracy, and people have and like their guns for lots of reasons, many of which are valid. I'm fine with letting people keep their guns while curbing some of the excesses of the current gun regime: Universal background checks would be a good start, and banning the 2 or 3 specific kinds of guns that can be used to kill a bunch of people at once pretty easily would be another good thing to do. It might be a good idea to enforce titles for guns (or certain kinds of guns) the way we do with cars, where you need the piece-of-paper legal document, and you need to get a new one when it changes hands.

SpaceNut · 2019-05-23 17:10:37

So what is the requirements to be able to purchase....

A person must be at least 18 years of age to purchase a rifle or shotgun from a licensed firearms dealer.

To purchase a handgun from a licensed firearms dealer, you must be at least 21 years of age, pursuant to federal law.

So guns like an "Automatic" rifle do not fit into the definition...
with no license requirement in some...

kbd512 · 2019-05-23 20:53:19

SpaceNut,

The "automatic" firearms you speak of, what people who know something about firearms refer to as "machine guns" (any firearm designed to expel more than one projectile by explosive means per pull of the trigger), are already heavily regulated by federal firearms laws. The registry for registering new automatic weapons was closed, permanently, in 1986. No new "machine guns" may be legally owned by civilians that were not entered into the federal registry prior to that date.

The only firearms that do not require a NICS check are firearms made prior to 1898 or those that do not use cartridges (cap-and-ball / black powder firearms). For BATFE purposes, those are not considered to be firearms subject to federal firearms regulations, although the ammunition components, such as the primers or powders, are subject to such regulations.

All other firearms, which would include normal handguns / rifles / shotguns (collectively, Title I firearms), short barrel rifles or shotguns / pen guns / machine guns / destructive devices (any explosive weapon such as grenades / other types of explosive devices / firearms other than BATFE-approved "sporting use" rifles or shotguns with muzzle diameters greater than 1/2") / "Any Other Weapon"- a catch-all category for unusual types of firearms or weapons (collectively, Title II firearms) require much more extensive background checks / finger-printing / law-enforcement approval.

Title I Firearm Examples
Handguns - Colt M1911A1; Colt Single Action Army Revolver (if made after 1898); Glock 17

Rifles - Colt AR15 w/ 16"+ barrel length; Remington M700 w/16"+ barrel length

Shotguns - Remington M870 w/18"+ barrel length; Mossberg M590A1 w/18"+ barrel length; Benelli M1014 w/18"+ barrel length

Firearm (special category of shotgun that doesn't fit the BATFE definition of a "shotgun") - Remington Tac-14 (factory modified M870) or Mossberg Shockwave (factory modified M590) w/14" barrel and overall length greater than 26" and pistol grip only

Title II Firearm Examples
AOW - Serbu Super Shorty (modified Remington M870 w/ pistol grip only- no shoulder stock, and overall length less than 26")

Short Barrel Rifle (SBR) - Colt AR15 w/ 14.5" barrel (any barrel length less than 16"); AKSU-74

Short Barrel Shotgun (SBS) - Remington 870 w/ 14" barrel and shoulder stock

Machine Gun - Colt M16A2 automatic rifle (barrel length unimportant for any machine gun); Glock 18 automatic pistol

Pen Gun - Braverman Stinger; various .22 caliber revolvers or single shots built into the handles of knives

Destructive Device (DD) - M67 fragmentation hand grenade; M252 81mm Mortar; M102 105mm towed howitzer; Nammo Talley Mk153 rocket launcher; Lockheed-Martin FGM-148 anti-tank guided missile; Colt 40mm grenade launcher; FN Herstal Mk19 40mm automatic grenade launcher; any explosive shell or munition, irrespective of type; any firearm with a muzzle / bore diameter greater than .50 caliber (1/2") not approved by BATFE as a "sporting use" firearm (basically, shotguns are the only exception)

You can still purchase and register pen guns, AOW's, SBR's, SBS's, and certain types of DD's. The single-shot 40mm M203 grenade launchers are one of the most common types of DD's. The AOW's require $5 tax stamps from BATFE and all other types of Title II firearms require a $200 tax stamp. Similarly, all sound suppressors also require $200 tax stamps. The government won't permit sale of fragmentation grenades, explosive 40mm grenades (the practice "orange chalk" rounds and certain types of signaling flares not classified as pyrotechnics are all that may be legally sold), rocket launchers, or guided missiles. The same applies to cannon ammunition.

You can legally buy a 20mm cannon after receiving the $200 tax stamp (basically, a gigantic bolt action rifle that weighs 59lbs to 130lbs, dependent on barrel profile, and 6' 8" in length), but the government won't permit sale of explosive 20mm shells (only the solid Aluminum PGU-27 Training-Practice rounds are available for civilian sale at $10 to $15 each). Those 20mm single-shot cannons go for something like $7,000 to $13,000. The optional sound suppressor is around $3,000, if you don't want to blow out your ear drums, even after you double-up on ear pro. I've stood right next to 25mm Bushmaster chain guns and 20mm Phalanx CIWS / M61 Gatling guns aboard a ship when it was firing at targets and can attest to the racket these things create. The sound suppressor might bring the noise levels down to that of an unsuppressed .30-06 or so. So, you need doubled-up hearing protection, even with a sound suppressor. That said, they are available for sale if you have really deep pockets.

After you've shot a .50 cal Browning machine gun or a 25mm Bushmaster chain gun in the military, you really don't miss hearing them go off. Virtually all of the rockets and missiles and mortars are also painfully loud. The Mk153 SMAW is mind-blowingly loud, for example. Handling the ammo for the cannons with someone who isn't physically strong enough to pick up the box is downright scary, and yet another thing I'll never miss. The .30 caliber belt-fed machine guns are great fun, so long as they're mounted to something solid. Anybody who says they're not has never used one and therefore wouldn't know anything about it.

IIRC, just like handguns, you also have to be 21 to purchase Title II firearms.

SpaceNut · 2019-05-24 17:17:13

The classification of what falls into what category is helpful to understanding that we have a failing system that needs modification.

As far has having owned any that would be none along with little need to do so, on having been educated on there use and firing several sizes of them that would be yes in NRA hunter safety classes around age 13, boy scouting camp fireline target course with 22's, hunting with single shot 410 and 20 plus 12 guage shot guns of various mag loadings....

kbd512 · 2019-05-24 18:26:28

SpaceNut,

The general level of ignorance about both our laws and our Constitution helps me to understand that we have a failing educational system, which does indeed require modification. A good start would be teaching traditional American values, which are diametrically opposed to excessive state control over both freedom of speech and the means of self defense. For anyone looking for advice on schooling options, that's the best advice I can provide. If the teachers at the school you send your child to are teaching your son or daughter to constantly rely upon the good nature of everyone else in the world for their very survival, at all times and under all circumstances, then your child has a serious educational problem and you are failing your duty to your child as a parent. Free men and women do not require anyone else's permission to defend themselves from criminal assaults, for they are not beholden to the capricious behavior of evil people.

The 2nd Amendment was never about camping or hunting. That's why no references to camping or hunting appear anywhere in the language of the 2nd Amendment. That might be why the Democrats' incessant attempts to conflate the two always fall flat on their face. Along with the entirety of the rest of our Constitution, 1A and 2A were pretty clear indicators that The Founders always intended for the state to be subservient to the sovereignty of the individual American, rather than the other way around. Despite the wholesale brainwashing of people at the hands of criminal miscreants masquerading as liberals or progressives, self defense and national defense are every bit as important today as they ever were at any point in our history. Time and technology may have changed, yet some of us believe that online posts or "tweets" are equally protected under 1A today, despite the fact that no such mass communication technology existed at the time that our Constitution was written. As such, all arguments that we may not use modern firearms technology to defend ourselves is equally inane and obnoxious as the suggestion that posting your ideas on the internet is not Constitutionally protected freedom of speech.

Historically, Americans understood that if you didn't have a firearm to hunt with, then you likely wouldn't have much to eat. However, that had nothing to do with why The Founders added the Amendments to our Constitution. They knew full well that evil power-hungry people seeking to subjugate and then enslave their fellow countrymen, like so many who fill the ranks of the Democrat and Republican political parties today, would never be able to subjugate an armed citizenry who were also free to speak their mind. We forget or revise our history at great peril. It's a little sad that so few people realize that today, but not the least bit surprising to me.

SpaceNut · 2019-05-26 18:25:40

the Virginia Chesapeake party shooting, At least 10 people shot with one death....

kbd512 · 2019-05-27 11:24:49

I'll presume that at least someone else besides myself is interested in solving this problem without taking things from people who have never committed any crimes and are exceptionally unlikely to ever do so. For those who are the slightest bit interested in why it is that school mass shootings committed by fellow school children are a recent and regular phenomenon, whereas we've had firearms in civilian hands (to include fully automatic firearms, better known as "machine guns") throughout the 1900's, you should listen to what the guest speaker in this series of videos has to say:

Why Children are Killing Children in Modern Society (1:2)

Why Children are Killing Children in Modern Society (2:2)

Although I generally don't listen to much of what Glenn Beck has to say, especially since I quit watching TV years ago, the name of his guest speaker happens to be Lt. Col. David Grossman. If you read the description beneath the YouTube video player, you'll see that Lt. Col. Grossman is one of the most credentialed and sought after military advisors who deals with the awful effects from violence, to include Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). In fact, at least one of his books is part of the required reading list (suggested reading list, actually, but suggestions in the military carry very different connotations than what civilians are used to) in the military. Amongst other books, I also read a copy of Sun Tzu that was sent to me by my father after I graduated from basic training. To understand a bit more about what we were doing, and out of concern for his son after the GWoT kicked off, my father took to reading what we were also required to read. If you haven't read "The Art of War", then you'd find it difficult to function in the Navy (or at least the commands I served) with the slew of references to material in that book, both in oral and written orders. There were times when I wondered if America's military was part of Sun Tzu's personal religious organization. I'm sure that the list of required reading has only grown since my time in the Navy.

There's a certain segment of our civilian population who think our military service men and women are just mindless robots executing programming. If only that were true, the systemic violence problems would be much easier to contend with because we could just stop programming people. In point of fact, most in our military know quite well what they are doing, why they are doing it, and take little issue with or even enjoy doing most of the shocking things they're routinely asked to do. We use what we know and what we've been taught / conditioned to do to crush our enemies in the most efficient and brutally effective ways that military minds and technological achievements can devise. Combined with improved medical technology to treat the wounded, that's why we have fewer deaths from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars after two decades of sustained combat operations than deaths from the violence perpetrated by young men on the perilous streets of Chicago, Illinois. Those who think "we aren't winning in Iraq and Afghanistan" are laughably ignorant of what our military objectives were to begin with. This exercise isn't about "winning a war". You can win individual battles by killing your enemies, and if you win enough battles they may be unable to continue fighting, but everyone ultimately loses in a war. Everyone, everytime, without exception. Let that truly sink in and then you might understand what we're actually doing... or so I hope- because the life of someone's son or daughter, even if they aren't an American, depends upon your understanding this. Perhaps our civilians would've questioned America's leadership more if they were aware, since we are never permitted to do that.

For those who want to know what our sailors are reading, you can start here:

CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL READING PROGRAM

For those who don't understand how suggestions work in the military, we don't have people running around saying, "I order you to do X." It goes something like this, "I think you should read this book or manual." The only proper response is "Aye" (short for "Aye aye", which means "I understand and will comply"- at least that's what we were taught; Marines still say "Aye aye"), whereupon you go and do what needs to be done. In all my interactions with the CO and XO (admittedly, I rarely saw the skipper until my last command whereupon I also interacted with him every day, but interacted with the XO on a routine basis) of the ships and squadron I served, I never once heard the words "I order you to do X." If the Captain asked you to do something, it was never just a suggestion or even just a really good idea. It seemed absolutely asinine, to us anyway, to "order" people who were there to voluntarily to do what our nation needed to get done. Basic training indoctrination aside, we never operated that way after basic training. If someone ever had to be reminded of what they were there to do, the reminder was harsh and unpleasant enough that it was never a problem.

Anyways, enough about how military indoctrination works, onwards...

I've reproduced the blurb here just in case our readers are unfamiliar with the YouTube web app:

Lt. Col. Dave Grossman was interviewed by Glenn Beck on January 2, 2013, on the topic of mass killings of children by children in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook massacre.
Lt. Grossman is one of the world's foremost experts in the field of human aggression and the roots of violence and violent crime. He is a former West Point psychology professor, Professor of Military Science, and an Army Ranger who has combined his experiences to become the founder of a new field of scientific endeavor, which has been termed -killology.- In this new field Col. Grossman has made revolutionary new contributions to our understanding of killing in war, the psychological costs of war, the root causes of the current -virus- of violent crime that is raging around the world, and the process of healing the victims of violence, in war and peace.
He is the author of On Killing, which was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize; has been translated into Japanese, Korean, and German; is on the U.S. Marine Corps Commandant's required reading list; and is required reading at the FBI academy and numerous other academies and colleges. Col. Grossman co-authored Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against TV, Movie and Video Game Violence, which has been translated into Norwegian and German, and has received international acclaim. Col. Grossman's most recent book, On Combat, has also placed on the U.S. Marine Corps Commandant's Required Reading List and has been translated into Japanese and Korean.
Col. Grossman has been called upon to write the entry on -Aggression and Violence- in the Oxford Companion to American Military History, three entries in the Academic Press Encyclopedia of Violence and numerous entries in scholarly journals, to include the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.
He has presented papers before the national conventions of the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
He has presented to over 100 different colleges and universities worldwide, and has trained educators and law enforcement professionals, in the field of school safety, at the state and regional level, in all 50 states and over a dozen foreign nations.
He helped train mental health professionals after the Jonesboro school shootings, and he was also involved in counseling or court cases in the aftermath of the Paducah, Springfield, Littleton, Virginia Tech, and Nickel Mines Amish school shootings.
He has been an expert witness and consultant in state and Federal courts, to include serving on the prosecution team in UNITED STATES vs. TIMOTHY MCVEIGH.
He has testified before U.S. Senate and Congressional committees and numerous state legislatures, and he and his research have been cited in a national address by the President of the United States.

You can take away all the firearms in America and we'll still be left with a growing mass murder problem because our so-called "entertainment" industry is teaching our children to derive pleasure from human death and suffering. Every person who witnesses the presentation of violence will process that information differently, which is why only a small portion of the people who partake go on to commit violent acts. However, to pretend that it doesn't negatively affect those who do commit violent acts is pure lunacy.

The aforementioned is just part of why I refuse to watch, or permit my children to watch, any of this mass indoctrination (brainwashing) into a culture of violence and death. It's a death cult, plain and simple, and I want no part of it. Anyone who doesn't think this affects how you perceive reality has never been through military indoctrination, wherein you are conditioned to respond without conscious thought or question as to what you're about to do. The indoctrination is of general utility to the military because instant response is often required to stay alive. Since my own father delved into a branch of psychology that dealt with such issues (human death and suffering, either self-inflicted or inflicted by others) in my formative years while he still worked at the hospital in Austin, I understood what was happening even as the majority of my peers in the military were simply doing what they were being conditioned to do by our military training system without a second thought. Knowing what little my father taught to me of neurolinguistic programming, I can state without reservation that mass indoctrination programming is exactly what the pervasive graphically violent content from our media industry amounts to. As a result, our children will kill without hesitation or reflection (before it's too late) because that's precisely what they've been "programmed" to do.

When I was a youngster growing up in 1980's America, I wasn't permitted to watch a "Rated R" movie, much less the graphic and grotesque violence perpetrated in today's movies and video games and TV shows. Neither of my grandfathers, both of whom had served in brutal close-combat in WWII (my father's side) and Korean War (my mother's side), ever wanted to watch a movie about a war. It took awhile for me to figure out why, but eventually I figured it out. As previously good natured young Americans, they were horrified by what they had done to their fellow man. Their nation asked them to serve, they loved their country, and so they did what was asked of them- to great personal detriment for the rest of their lives, both physically and emotionally. Their lives were both profoundly changed by what they saw and what they did in those wars.

If there's a prescient takeaway from all of this, it's that American parents should never permit their children to be unwitting participants in death cults. We have obscenity laws that prevents us from showing a woman's breast on TV, but not the most horrific murders imaginable? There's something that's just profoundly wrong about that current state of affairs. Any simpleton who thinks they're going to ban guns and somehow stop or even reduce the level of violence in our society is only deluding him or her self. In comparison to today, certain societies of the past that glorified murder and mayhem were hyper-violent long before the invention of firearms.

Maybe some here are ignorant enough to believe that someone who has been run over by a car has "died a better death" than someone who was shot with a firearm. I assure you that there are no separate categories of "dead" for people who have been murdered- dead is still dead, forever and always. Anyone who thinks being "gun violence" is more gruesome than "knife violence" has never witnessed the results of a stabbing death, either. Predictably, the "banners" in the UK are now calling for banning or running background checks to purchase kitchen utensils. Those people are too stupid to accept that violence is the problem and instead focus on the instruments of violence because they're so thoroughly terrified of the people committing the violence that they don't want to deal with the fact that we have a small but ever-growing population of hyper-violent youngsters who have been programmed to be violent by the same evil cretins claiming there's no problem with spewing out hyper-violent video games, movies, and TV shows. The violent media industry lobby is no different than the Tobacco lobby. They know full well that their product is responsible for killing people and they're lying about it and pointing the finger at the very instrument they use to depict graphic violence in all of their grotesque products.

SpaceNut · 2019-05-27 15:15:44

kbd512 wrote:

You can take away all the firearms in America and we'll still be left with a growing mass murder problem because our so-called "entertainment" industry is teaching our children to derive pleasure from human death and suffering. Every person who witnesses the presentation of violence will process that information differently, which is why only a small portion of the people who partake go on to commit violent acts. However, to pretend that it doesn't negatively affect those who do commit violent acts is pure lunacy.

Very valid assessment as if you once was entertained by pro wrestling versus todays WWE or others they are very violent, cheat and bend the rules as if they only thing is to win at any cost with very little wrestling content. Programming the viewers....that its how life should be and its not...

When did mass shootings start?
The very first mass school shooting was a century ago on June 20, 1913 in a school in Bremen, Germany. But when did it happen in the US and what culturely changed..

https://www.k12academics.com/school-sho … ted-states

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s … ted_States

Since the 1840's civil war era.....

Terraformer · 2019-05-27 15:29:48

As far as I know, American children aren't being exposed to anything British children aren't also exposed to. Yet we're not having mass stabbings in schools, despite the easy availability of knives. No, there's something else about American culture as well that's contributing to it. Something that would have changed around the middle to late 20th century, maybe a decade or so before they started going up...

As far as video games are concerned, I'm more worried about children (and adults) giving themselves PTSD from hyper-realistic Virtual Reality.

kbd512 · 2019-05-27 16:01:41

SpaceNut,

I'm talking about children mass murdering other children, not accidents, incidents at universities perpetrated by adults against other adults and children, incidents involving multiple individuals shooting at each other for tribalistic reasons, the ill effects of racist ideology taught by Democrats, or adults killing children.

Children were not mass murdering other children with firearms or other weapons in the 1840's. A single person being shot or someone killing a child and then subsequently being shot at the school by the child's father don't qualify as mass murder. It's all well and good to post Wikipedia articles to try to refute what I posted, but then you need to actually read what was written in those Wikipedia articles. Intellectually lazy practices such as that continue to contribute to the problem.

Terraformer,

And yet... The UK still has mass murderers committing an increasing number of mass murders. One only needs to look at the Wikipedia article on that issue to see that the frequency increasing, even without access to firearms. In a country with more guns than people, we should all be dead by now if the banners arguments carried water. They don't, obviously, because the problem is obviously the violence and not any specific instrument.

The Las Vegas terrorist killed 58 people and injured 422 with multiple firearms. The guy killed himself while our Police were screwing around. The Nice, France truck terrorist killed 86 and injured 434 with a single truck. The truck driver also had a small pistol that he fired at the French Police, but the French Police returned fire with their own pistols and killed him. For some reason, we still have a lot of people over here in America who think they're going to ban guns and end violence. Their thinking is so laughably absurd that nobody capable of basic logic would ever believe it. Unfortunately, we have far too many "logically challenged" people over here. These are the same people who think we should have open borders. Like I said before, though, they're logically challenged.

Edit:

It should be noted that the pistol that the terrorist in France had was illegal for him to have, yet he had it anyway.

Why?

Hold the press, people.

Apparently...

CRIMINALS DON'T FOLLOW THE LAW!

Crazy concept, huh?

I guess it's better to run away while doing your best imitation of a terrified farm animal than it is to use your own pistol as an object lesson to everyone else left alive regarding why it is that you don't go around randomly killing people.

I wish I could be a good little lemming like all the gun banners. If I was the only person in the world that I actually cared about, maybe that would be enough. Unfortunately, I grew up. As a result, the reasoning system I used as a teenager had to be replaced with something approaching practicality. Later in life, I also had children. After that happened, what I wanted from my own little teenage fantasy world where there was no violence and we'd all sing "Kumbaya" is no longer relevant to this rather ugly little thing called "objective reality".

Last edited by kbd512 (2019-05-27 16:45:27)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#101 2018-11-03 17:26:48

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#102 2018-11-04 18:14:26

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#103 2018-11-05 05:55:17

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#104 2018-11-05 10:21:20

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#105 2018-11-05 18:22:26

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#106 2018-11-08 19:28:01

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#107 2018-11-08 20:35:00

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#108 2018-11-08 20:43:10

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#109 2018-11-08 21:56:15

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#110 2018-11-11 16:36:28

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#111 2018-11-12 10:03:51

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#112 2018-11-12 21:33:47

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#113 2018-11-19 17:57:48

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#114 2019-05-19 06:11:18

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#115 2019-05-23 17:01:11

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#116 2019-05-23 17:04:37

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#117 2019-05-23 17:10:37

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#118 2019-05-23 20:53:19

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#119 2019-05-24 17:17:13

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#120 2019-05-24 18:26:28

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#121 2019-05-26 18:25:40

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#122 2019-05-27 11:24:49

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#123 2019-05-27 15:15:44

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#124 2019-05-27 15:29:48

Re: Advice to parents on school options

#125 2019-05-27 16:01:41

Re: Advice to parents on school options

Board footer