Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

OT: A moment of silence and prayer


Sepiatone

Recommended Posts

finance wrote:"How does the 2nd Amendment guarantee "American freedoms" more than, say, the 1st Amendment?"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Well finance, in my view it doesn't, at least not in any modern industrialized western democracy anymore. However, as I made note of down below, there seems to be many Americans who still believe that it does somehow(and now a little personal opinion to follow), BUT as far as I can tell, many of the people who DO still believe what I feel is now this obsolete and mistaken belief, ALSO often tend to suffer from juuuuuuust a little too much paranoia in their lives.

 

(...and now that I've explained this to ya, this will DEFINITELY be the last comment I'll make on THAT subject, as I don't want this thread to go down that rabbit hole and somehow excite some person or persons who indeed MIGHT be suffering from that little extra bit of paranoia to then use this thread in efforts to make you and I see why they might indeed BE suffering from said paranoia!!!) ;)

 

LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

I havent been following the story too closely (is just too much bombardment and too depressing) At first they said the mother was a teacher there. Now I've heard she wasnt? How did that misinformation get out? It makes the motive even murkier to me. Why would the son go there? (as opposed to his high school or some other place?) I just dont understand how a single mother with an emotionally disturbed son keeps guns lying around the house like that.........

 

Edited by: Hibi on Dec 18, 2012 12:35 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, to reiterate MY point, on the VERY NIGHT of the day of the tragedy, PEIRS MORGAN, on his program brought in two individuals from opposite ends of the spectrum of the gun control issue. Within a couple of minutes, the discussion turned into a shouting match, with neither side allowing the other to finish making their point.

 

 

I thereby rest my case.

 

 

And as pointed out that too many ignore the preamble to the 2nd amendment and only concentrate on that section which pleases them, the 1st AMENDMENT as well, gets largely ignored when it states it's tenets for the importance of the separation of church and state. ie: "Congress shall make no law in the establishment of religion, nor prohibit the free practice thereof".

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

LadyE wrote:"And to dig deeper into the cultural issue, to me the real question IS, 2nd amendment or no 2nd amendment, what compels a 40-something, apparently perfectly sane, middle-class woman to own such weapons...don't you think that's a cultural issue?"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Well LadyE, yes, maybe that whole "cultural" issue might've played a hand in this tradegy as well, and in many of the other similar occurrences to this that have befallen our country. I mean, we Americans DO seem to glorify violence in many ways, don't we.

 

BUT, in this latest one, and in the one that happened down in Tucson Arizona a while back, I just think these were cases of so-called previously "HONEST AND LAW-ABIDING" PARENTS NOT USIN' ANY FREAKIN' COMMON SENSE AND BEING IN DENIAL ABOUT THE STATE OF THEIR CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEATH, AND THEN ALLOWING FIREARMS TO BE KEPT INSIDE THEIR FREAKIN' HOMES, WHICH THEN ALLOWED THEIR KIDS EASY ACCESS TO LETHAL WEAPONS!!!

 

(...sorry, didn't mean to shout there, but SOMEHOW too many freakin' people who are tryin' to explain these kinds of tragedies somehow seem to overlook this extremely salient point here...and somehow in today's America, the only way some people seem to get a grasp on certain points IS when it's SHOUTED at 'em in a bombastic manner) ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Morgan is so immature I don't understand why CNN has him on. Anytime he has someone on that he disagrees with he either just yells at them or he gets that dumb look of disbelieve. He doesn't make any attempt to understand (not agree with) the POV of the other side. He is worst than the guys on Fox!

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But you see, James, Peirs is NOT the only person LIKE that. Many people might seem level headed and reasonably even tempered UNTIL you hit one that one particular topic that's close to their hearts. THEN they go ballistic, and sound off vapidly. By THEN, it's TOO LATE.

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to offer a little perspective since I am involved in some of the issues being discussed here.

 

First, Sandy Hook Elementary School is about a 20-minute drive from my house. This has hit close to home; each day, I have to see the lead stories in the local paper about this, and see the faces of those kids and adults. One of those adults was attending the university where I teach; several others were graduates of the university.

 

My job is to supervise student teachers in middle and high schools. The security in most of these schools stinks. I can name one school where I can walk in, move about freely without being questioned, and leave without anyone knowing I was there. I can name several schools where I can enter through an unlocked door, and the only thing standing between me and the kids is one unarmed person who hands me a visitor's pass. I can name schools that have buzzer systems, which open as soon as I ring the buzzer; thankfully there are other schools where I need to Iidentify myself before I can enter. Finally, I have walked through metal detectors in some inner-city schools. Until the security issue is addressed, these incidents will continue, even without semi-automatic weapons (which I favor banning). I am all for having a professional, armed guard at the main entrance of every school system in this country.

 

On the subject of mental illness, there are conflicting reports about the shooter's "affliction," if any. Yes, it seems someone would have to be crazy to do this, but someone who is just flat out angry would do the same thing. And it is the anger part that bothers me. I recently visited one school, and observed one student wearing earphones through an entire lesson, totally disengaged from everything. When I asked the student teacher why she did not say anything to the student, her reply was "no one is allowed to say anything to that student." My question then is, when someone finally does challenge the student, what will the outcome be?

 

I have made a donation to my university in memory of the adults. I am still pondering what to do about the kids. I'd suggest that, instead of buying that newest blu-ray version of some DVD this year, you all consider making a donation to some charity that will help the families of those kids.

 

Rich

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, well, haven't you guys ever noticed that in today's America it's primarily the extremes and the extremist's POV which get most media coverage AND the highest ratings, because the vast majority of Americans "vote" with their TV remotes to watch "heat" more than "light" in these sorts or things, and that it's seldom the people who say things such as "Well, we don't learn anything from each other whenever we raise our voices" who get scant said media coverage?

 

And thus is why I, a self-professed Middle-of-the-Roader, will sometimes play that "bombastic card" TOO and raise MY voice(or the Internet equivalent which is of course this overuse of the uppercase) JUST in efforts to gain a little freakin' ATTENTION from others for at least a second or two whenever I wish to press a point that needs "pressing"!

 

(...yeah, I know, it's kinda pathetic, but HEY as they say.."If ya can't beat 'em, JOIN 'em", HUH!!!) ;)

 

LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for presenting your insight into this, Rich. Your first-hand experience in these matters made for an interesting read.

 

(...though for some reason I keep thinkin' that if ONLY you would uppercased just a few words in your text, it MIGHT'VE driven your thoughts home a little more!...nah, jus' kiddin') ;)

 

Edited by: Dargo2 on Dec 18, 2012 1:31 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL Dargo2...not sure if you were Shouting at me or at the "situation", but I get your point...Common Sense and Respect...simple recipe, ain't it? Yet, it seems so lacking these days...I stopped trying to "explain " or "understand" situations like these long time ago, especially when my friends back home start coming to me for asnwers about these issues with the standard lines - "US are crazy, over here is different!". What happened it's just a reflection of the times we live in, simple as that. My theory is that with the US being right now the spearhead of the Western world, sooner or later, if the Mayans are wrong and we are still here past Dec 21, as other parts of the World catch up, these things will be more common there too, it's just the nature of the beast (society/globalization...).

 

The biggest tragedies are always the most difficult to understand/address, because the root causes are way deeper than the usual simplistic/superficial analysis will allow.You have to keep asking why until you run out of whys...and in this case...it would be too long, so I guess, as fascinating as this subject is, as you pointed out earlier, we should go back to talk about Classic Films.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your insight and your perspective on this issue, scsu. It is one thing to see the images on tv and feel the sadness from a distance.. but I am sure it is another matter altogether to have it happening right in front of you. Thank you for your suggestions too.. about finding a way to donate somehow. Whether in a donation to a school or college.. or some sort of practical gift to meet the more immediate needs of the hurting families.. I think it all is a great way to show your support for those who have lost so much.

 

 

 

A lot of people (myself included) feel helpless just to stand by and watch so many who are suffering. It is natural to want to find a way to offer comfort to those who are hurting and it is good to try and find an outlet for the compassion that is breaking the hearts of so many right now. I know not eveyrone puts much stock in prayer.. but I do, and that has been more or less all that I have found to do for them.. it is the only heartfelt gift I can offer for now so that is what I have chosen to do. But the main thing (at least to me) is to find a way (any way, that people may feel led) to show these families that they are cared for.. and do it. So again.. I like your idea very much. Thank you for sharing it.

 

 

 

I have been reading about an out of state group who has been making a difference in your area by bringing a huge donation of home baked pies to the people of that community. Though it is quite the undertaking (from what I read) still I imagine it is only some small gesture in the great scheme of things. But, in a time where things are so devastating for so many, I bet even the smallest effort is very much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point, Hibi. However, I'm not sure in either the case of parents down in Tucson OR the mother in this most recent case could be described as "well off financially". It seems me be that in both cases they were of middle-income means. And, from what I've heard, it seems it's most often the middle-class which, as they say, "falls through the cracks" when it comes to mental heath issues.

 

However, as they ALSO say, "Where there's a will, there's a way", I believe in many of these cases there seemed to be more than just a little denial going on in these households as to how much financial effort should be expended upon their offsprings' problems.

 

(...well, I know in the case of the Tucson's gunman's father, there seemed to be a WHOLE lot of denial goin' on down there as to his reading the warning signs and getting help for his kid anyway)

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=jamesjazzguitar wrote:}{quote}Well I just have to respond when someone makes a statement that is so factually incorrect, as in: .

>

> "This horrible slaughter would not have happened if the killer had not been able to access a certain type of weapon."

>

>

>

>

>

> Here is just one example of how the killer using standard non semi-automatic guns, could of killed or harmed just as many; Enter the school with a box of home made fire bombs. OK, maybe not as many would of died but still, killing would NOT of been prevented.

>

>

>

>

>

> Thus the 'would not have happened' line is just not factual. ...

>

James, we usually get along quite well, and I consider us to be on good terms on these forums. But I have to say, I found your response to my post insulting. To say it was "factually incorrect" seems an extreme response.

Yes, ok, the killer could have concocted some home made bombs. Or something else, maybe. But for one thing, that would have taken some advance planning. I'm not saying every nut case who goes on the rampage and unleashes a barrage of bullets on the unsuspecting public does so spontaneously, probably they've thought about it for a while. The little I know about such people indicates this to be so.

But it's also true that sometimes the angry crazy person just decides he's going to act "now", and if there just happens to be a giant assault weapon lying around his home, it's easy to pick it up and head out and kill.

Banning weapons of the kind I'm talking about would not eradicate all the hate-filled senseless massacres in the States. But it would go a long way towards making a difference.

So I don't think I was being " factually incorrect." When it's easy to get one's hands on these extreme military-class guns, then it's much easier for people to use them. Use them on crowds of people. You say "ok, maybe not as many would have died..."

Exactly.

I have to ask, what possible reason would an ordinary civilian have for purchasing and possessing such weapons? There is no answer that makes any sense. It certainly isn't necessary for self-defence. These guns are designed for mass attack, they're made for the sole purpose of killing many human beings in a few seconds. I still say if the murderer in this most recent mass slaughter had not had such a weapon, it would not have been the terrible event that it was.

I was not being "factually incorrect".

 

Edited by: misswonderly on Dec 18, 2012 2:18 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't know about where any of you all live, but here in Michigan the first thing that comes to mind when state legeslators want to cut back on state expenses is to shut down state mental health facilities. They closed a LOT of them down in the late'70's-early '80's, and the patients were simply put out and now make up a large part of the homeless.

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I didn't mean to insult you but I still believe what you initially posted isn't close to being accurate.

 

Again, you used the phase 'would NOT of happened'. While I agree changes to laws could be made to reduce the damage caused by the type of people who do these things (which I mention in my reply), there is NO evidence of any kind that changes to laws would prevent these type of events from NOT happening.

 

Thus I agree with you 100% when you post "it would not have been the terrible event that it was" but that comment is a lot different than the one you initially posted of 'would NOT of happened'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The part about the well regulated Militia seems, for whatever reason, to be

downplayed and the Supreme Court recently upheld the Second Amendment

as allowing the individual ownership of firearms. I doubt there will be little

new legislation, except something that nibbles around the edges of the issue.

Perhaps back in the late 18th century, people with rifles could have held off

the government, today that's not very likely.

 

Apparently his mother became interested in target shooting and likely self-

defense, so she had the right to have those guns. It wasn't very smart to

introduce her son, since she knew he had some behavioral problems, to

those weapons.

 

As that American philosopher and convicted murderer H. Rap Brown said,

"Violence is as American as cherry pie."

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

WHOA!!! THREE Hundred Grand a year ya say she was pullin' in, Hibi?!!!!

 

Well, I didn't know she and her kid were livin' on THAT kinda bread. And so yeah, she was definitely living more than that "Middle Class" lifestyle I mentioned earlier, huh!

 

However, I believe I did either read or hear that she did spend a lot of money on her kid's welfare and especially in regard to his mental health.

 

And so, I suppose this just once again boils down to maybe yet another "previously responsible honest and law-abiling citizen" who in THIS case somehow didn't have the common sense enough to think it possible that it just "MIGHT NOT" be a "smart move" to teach her kid with known mental health issues how to indulge in that little sport she evidently found so much pleasure in, AND a sport in which the possibilities for dangerous results aren't exactly as low as say givin' the kid a freakin' TENNIS RACQUET and maybe havin' him learn THAT sport instead, huh?! AND of course, because SHE lacked this common sense, all these poor dear little kids and those adults paid the ultimate price for it, huh!

 

(...aah, but so goes the wages of the sports we all hold so dear, huh...yep, in fact I got a VERY bad scratch on my right elbow when I dove for a shot down the line and fell over while I was on the tennis courts yesterday!!!)

 

:smirk:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the Administrator has issued several warnings to tread lightly or not at all on overtly politcal discussions. Perhaps this is not solely a political discussion and hasn't reached a point of contentiousnes to warrant such an edict. But thank you for recommending a good afternoon of reading material. Much obliged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I KNOW, Raquel...and THAT'S why I just brought up the subject of TENNIS here, young lady!!!

 

LOL

 

(...of course to make a point about which I consider REAL "sports" and which I DON'T!...but don't get me wrong here, li'l darlin'...I HAVE shot a few guns in my life!)

 

ROFL

 

Edited by: Dargo2 on Dec 18, 2012 3:49 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, did you rachet up the rancor !

 

I'm not desiring to shut down the thread but these topics can spiral quite quickly although your latest post is evidence you are still looking to foment dissension avec moi and that may give the Admin pause to consider it based on your sarcastic comment.

 

Cheers mate!

 

 

Keep smiling, Labatt Blue smiles along with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

RaquelVixen: You consider the post by DarkBlue, right below your comment 'ugly'? Sorry I just don't see it. I went back to look at his original post and while it was political (but no more than mine), it wasn't ugly or offensive as far as I could see.

 

I just don't see where the rancor is in his comments.

 

 

(PS: Is the spell checker here the worst one in ever? I spelled offensive, without one 'f' (ofensive), and the choices it gave me were nothing close to this? The spell checker in Word automatically fixed it (i.e. added that missing 'f').

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I continue to think that it's good to have this discussion, in all arenas. Thank goodness, it has become a mainstream country-wide discussion, and I think there will be a good dialogue and some action. Something that I find interesting -- I was out all day but just watched some talk shows from the treadmill -- is that there are always people who seem to say that no action will totally solve the problem, so there's no point in doing anything. Make guns harder to get, people will still get them. Yes, but guns are not drugs; they are not addictive in the same way. Certain controls will make it more difficult to get, and maybe those ridiculous adjustments that made that assault weapon in CT not technically an assault weapon, will be done away with. I think there is going to be some agreement, and even the NRA has made encouraging noises.

 

I'd like to make two points. I remember the debate about sanctions and South Africa. People who were against sanctions dressed up their opposition by saying that sanctions would hurt average people there. But in the end, it was sanctions that helped end apartheid. Regarding gun controls, people say guns don't kill people, people kill people. But fairly recent controls imposed in Australia have been a great success; and after the UK's terrible massacre in Scotland in the 1990s, controls were put into place. There hasn't been an episode like that since. So, if more control helps to solve the problem, at least a little, that would be great. If it doesn't, it certainly won't do any harm.

 

But it is also worth noting that the rancor one fears here in various conversations -- not just the political ones -- generally comes from the same posters. So I don't think that it's the subject under discussion that makes these people rancourous, I think that's just the way they are, and will continue to be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...