The Solution to our Nation’s ‘Gun Problem’

[Guest]

by Gary DeMar

Killing people is a moral problem not a societal problem. There are few people who want to talk about morality these days. It’s no wonder that there are no longer any moral taboos. What was considered immoral 40 years ago is being made formally legal today by voters, legislators, and our courts. I believe there is a relationship between “defining deviancy down” and an increase in the disregard for other people. An uptick in ‘Moral Misfits‘ is the result.

The usual suspects are out in force calling for additional gun-control measures. School children are most vulnerable to gun violence. They can’t defend themselves, and neither can the teachers. Schools are “Gun Free Zones,” but only for the law abiding. Criminals don’t care about gun laws; that’s why they’re criminals.

Thieves don’t care about laws against theft, and rapists don’t care about laws against rape. The same is true about drinking and driving. We’ve just had a high profile drunk driving arrest. “Dallas Cowboys nose tackle Josh Price-Brent was arrested early Saturday morning [December 8, 2012] on intoxication manslaughter charges involving a car accident that killed teammate Jerry Brown.”

Laws won’t stop people intent on doing harm.

So what do the law-abiding citizens do? They arm themselves just like they would in war. There are terror insurgents in the United States hell-bent on destroying others. That’s a fact.

Just the other day a young woman was murdered when she told three teenage thugs to “get a job.”

More people are killed in the United States through violent means than are killed in our current foreign wars. In March of this year, violence in Chicago had left 52 people dead – more than twice as many as died in the March of 2011. There were 39 Coalition Military Fatalities in Afghanistan during the same month.

Schools should immediately develop a program where every teacher is trained in how to handle a firearm. All teachers must comply to get hired. If Israel can do it, why not America? Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America wrote the following in 2008: “In the mid-seventies, a terrorist attacked an Israeli school bus, murdering over 30 children. . . . A majority of Israelis . . . found a compelling reason for putting guns in schools — terrorists would get guns whether Jews were armed or not. As a result, schools in border areas, and school buses, were manned with gun-toting teachers or others assigned to be at the ready.”

Signs should be posted around the school that read:

“The teachers and administrators of this school are armed and trained in deadly force. Anybody attempting to enter the school intending to do harm will be shot on sight.”

Instead, if a student draws on paper, what looks like a gun, he’ll be suspended for ten days.

And what should we do with those who are involved in a murder spree? They should be executed. The man who shot and killed a number of people at Gabrielle Gifford’s campaign rally and the man who killed the people in the movie theater are still alive.

There is no doubt that these men killed these people. Their mental state, either before or after the shootings, is irrelevant. They should be dead by now.

We need some public executions to send a message.

Let’s stop blaming law-abiding citizens and go after the criminals.

http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/12/the-solution-to-our-nations-gun-problem/#ixzz2FEJvwGxT

[Neil D]

Quote:

Killing people is a moral problem not a societal problem. There are few people who want to talk about morality these days. It’s no wonder that there are no longer any moral taboos. What was considered immoral 40 years ago is being made formally legal today by voters, legislators, and our courts. I believe there is a relationship between “defining deviancy down” and an increase in the disregard for other people. An uptick in ‘Moral Misfits‘ is the result.

The usual suspects are out in force calling for additional gun-control measures. School children are most vulnerable to gun violence. They can’t defend themselves, and neither can the teachers. Schools are “Gun Free Zones,” but only for the law abiding. Criminals don’t care about gun laws; that’s why they’re criminals.

What a bunch of hogwaxh! RLH, don't you have an original thought that's yours???? You post this filth and don't think how it conflicts with your theology....

Society is sick...Oh, YOU are the only perfect person???? I'll let you and Bonnie decide who's more perfect....But doesn't the Adventist theology say that mankind is sick...Who can 'know the heart?"

If our society is sick, doesn't that imply that sick people will use perfect tools inperfectly? Doesn't it behoove us to make stricter laws to protect the imperfect among us???

So, you want guns in our society...I can live without those guns...It is therefore YOUR responsibility and emcombant upon you, to make laws such that I don't have to deal with your irresponsible results...such as this past weekend and the 20 "dangerous" first graders.

So, if you don't make stricter rules for the use of guns, I guarantee that my people in this society will remove all guns from society and anyone found with a gun, will be shot and killed for potential murder...[now, I admit, that is a bit extreme, but that is what you are facing.]

So, the question is, what rules are you willing to put in place....?

[OzarkWoman]

Quote:

Killing people is a moral problem not a societal problem. There are few people who want to talk about morality these days. It’s no wonder that there are no longer any moral taboos. What was considered immoral 40 years ago is being made formally legal today by voters, legislators, and our courts. I believe there is a relationship between “defining deviancy down” and an increase in the disregard for other people. An uptick in ‘Moral Misfits‘ is the result.

The usual suspects are out in force calling for additional gun-control measures. School children are most vulnerable to gun violence. They can’t defend themselves, and neither can the teachers. Schools are “Gun Free Zones,” but only for the law abiding. Criminals don’t care about gun laws; that’s why they’re criminals.

What a bunch of hogwaxh! RLH, don't you have an original thought that's yours???? You post this filth and don't think how it conflicts with your theology....

Society is sick...Oh, YOU are the only perfect person???? I'll let you and Bonnie decide who's more perfect....But doesn't the Adventist theology say that mankind is sick...Who can 'know the heart?"

If our society is sick, doesn't that imply that sick people will use perfect tools inperfectly? Doesn't it behoove us to make stricter laws to protect the imperfect among us???

So, you want guns in our society...I can live without those guns...It is therefore YOUR responsibility and emcombant upon you, to make laws such that I don't have to deal with your irresponsible results...such as this past weekend and the 20 "dangerous" first graders.

So, if you don't make stricter rules for the use of guns, I guarantee that my people in this society will remove all guns from society and anyone found with a gun, will be shot and killed for potential murder...[now, I admit, that is a bit extreme, but that is what you are facing.]

So, the question is, what rules are you willing to put in place....?

Anyone extremism???

[Neil D]

Anyone extremism???

What is extreme? To say that the death of 20 first graders is not your responsiblity? Granted, you didn't shoot them, but it is your responsiblity.

You say that society can live with guns....I say that it can't...I'm willing to let you prove your point....but this last weekend doesn't do that....A mental patient took his mother's guns, killed her and then went on a rampage and killed over 20 first graders....that IS your responsibility....you caused that...you allowed guns in OUR society...

You had better come up with better laws, because this shows an irresponsiblity on your part.....

[lazarus]

The US clearly has a problem with gun violence. The figures reveal that Americans resort to guns to settle disputes in disproportional numbers to individuals in the rest of the developed world.

Why is this the case?

[Neil D]

Anyone extremism???

Or is this the extemism you are talking about?

[video:yahoo]http://news.yahoo.com/utah-boy-charged-bringing-gun-school-cites-fears-023430546.html

School is NOT a safe place now...KIDS are bringing guns to school...and I've seen rifles brought to schools....so, dont tell me that this is an "isolated" incident....

[bonnie]

What a bunch of hogwaxh! RLH, don't you have an original thought that's yours???? You post this filth and don't think how it conflicts with your theology....

[Neil D]

You provide a whole new definition of "liberal tolerance"

[Guest]

Neil, up until today, I was giving you full credit for being twice as smart as you actually are. Even after that dirty underhanded stuff you tried to pull with Maria.

I know there are people like you in the world.

Low information people.

Among other things.

[Guest]

...:

[Guest]

,,,

[Guest]

I know one thing to be a fact. And that is, people who are led by their emotions, and base their decisions on how they feel, instead of facts, or intellect, can be led anywhere. And they consistently make wrong, and often stupid decisions.

[Tom Wetmore]

You provide a whole new definition of "liberal tolerance"

As compared to "conservative tolerance" (some might say that's an oxymoron...) which in the name of unrestricted gun rights is apparently willing to tolerate criminals and wackos having access to guns to kill innocent children.

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

You provide a whole new definition of "liberal tolerance"

As compared to "conservative tolerance" (some might say that's an oxymoron...) which in the name of unrestricted gun rights is apparently willing to tolerate criminals and wackos having access to guns to kill innocent children.

Determined criminals and wackos generally are not stopped by laws.A law does not have the ability to remove illegal weapons off the streets,anymore than they successfully remove drugs. Regardless of any laws passed innocents will be killed by those without regard for all the laws you want passed.

Since 1948 our family and extended family have lost over 2 dozen family members to violent death,including two of my siblings and a "son" we raised and a cousin to a serial killer in 1980

There were various laws designed to protect them and they are still just as dead.Not because the law abiding disobeyed

but because of those without regard for the many laws already on the books.

The laws against a serial killer and his acts covers a wide array of laws.Have you any idea how many have lost their lives since 1980 to serial killers? How many serial killers have said,OOPS,can't do this with an assault rifle,that is illegal.

A few years ago our area had a series of break ins. The guilty were pretty experienced at their craft. In the neighborhoods hit,they left one type of homeowner alone.

We have a gun range here and many train before purchasing handguns.On completion of the course they are given some pretty deadly looking window/door stickers to display.

Not one house displaying those stickers was bothered.

My husband worked nights the first few years we were married as did many in a two block radius. Some "wacko" started bothering those of us that were alone at night.At first it seemed more of a prank and then got a lot more serious.

I had two babies at the time and was not very comfortable after dark. As screens were removed and doors were tested to see if they were locked my brother came to spend a few nights.

After realizing there was someone outside again,my brother raised the window and shot my husband's double barreled shotgun in the air and called out,"Please come again"

Obviously my street was not bothered again.

As for tolerance,I am not the one calling or hoping "my people" kill those that disagree with me

[Guest]

Determined criminals and wackos generally are not stopped by laws.A law does not have the ability to remove illegal weapons off the streets,anymore than they successfully remove drugs. Regardless of any laws passed innocents will be killed by those without regard for all the laws you want passed.

She's righter than she's ever been, Tom.

[Guest]

Quote:

Low information people.

We used to call em morons. :)

[bonnie]

I think we need Obama to issue an executive order against cell phones in vehicles.

Especially teenagers need to be forbidden to have a cell phone in the car.

We do have laws forbidding cell phone use and texting while driving in many states, but it is not being obeyed.That inanimate object is the cause of many needless deaths and injuries,many young innocent children.

There Needs To Be A Law,Cell Phones kill in The Hands of The Wrong People and is unnecessary.

2011 Distracted Driving Statistics

Most adults who drive admit to engaging in distracted driving behaviors, according to a HealthDay poll from November 10-14, 2011. More than 2,800 American adults responded to the poll. Results showed the following statistics:

Approximately 86% of drivers said they ate or drank while driving at some point, and 57% said they do it “sometimes” or “often.”

Over 1/3 of drivers (37%) have sent or received text messages while driving, and 18% said they do it regularly.

Forty-one percent of adult drivers have set or changed a GPS system while driving, and 21% do it “more frequently.”

Many adult drivers (36%) have read a map while driving, and 10% do it “sometimes” or “often.”

One in five drivers have combed or styled his or her hair while driving. One in ten does it regularly.

Have you ever seen a driver putting on makeup? Approximately 14% have done it once, and 7% do it frequently.

About 13% of adult drivers have surfed the Internet while driving.

Results of the poll showed that younger drivers were more likely to engage in distracted driving. Men were more likely to drive while drowsy, drive after drinking, read a map, use a GPS system, and use the Internet.

A large percentage of the people said they know distracted driving is dangerous, but do it anyway.

Driver Electronic Use in 2010

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the percentage of drivers who were using a cell phone (texting or manipulating it in some way) increased to 0.9% in 2010.

The percentage of drivers using a cell phone while holding it to their ears was 5% in 2010

The level of hand-held cell phone use was higher among female drivers than it was for male drivers.

Younger drivers ages 16 to 24 were more likely to use a hand-held cell phone.

More than three-quarters reported that they were likely to answer calls on all, most, or some trips while driving. They also said that they rarely consider traffic situations when deciding to use their cell phones.

There were 3,092 deaths in distraction-related accidents in 2010, but the number is likely much higher.

Most drivers said they are willing to answer a call or text while driving, but most of these same drivers said they would feel unsafe as a passenger in a car where the driver was sending or receiving text messages.

Texting While Driving Statistics

About 6,000 deaths and a half a million injuries are caused by distracted drivers every year.

While teenagers are texting, they spend about 10 percent of the time outside the driving lane they’re supposed to be in.

Talking on a cell phone while driving can make a young driver’s reaction time as slow as that of a 70-year-old.

Answering a text takes away your attention for about five seconds. That is enough time to travel the length of a football field.

2009 Cell Phone and Distracted Driving Statistics

In 2009, 5,474 people were killed in the U.S. because of accidents that involved distracted driving. Another 448,000 were injured.

Of the 5,474 killed because of distracted driving, 995 involved reports of a cell phone as a factor. However, the number of fatalities caused by cell phone use could be much higher. For those who were injured, 24,000 involved reports of cell phone use as a distraction.

The under-20 age group had the highest percentage of distracted drivers; 16% of drivers under 20 years old involved in fatal crashes were distracted while driving.

The 30- to 39-year-old age group had the highest percentage of cell phone use in fatal crashes.

More people are driving while distracted when they are involved in fatal crashes. The percentage of fatalities associated with distracted drivers increased from 10% in 2005 to 16% in 2009.

In 2009, 867 fatal crashes were reported to have involved cell phones as a means for driver distraction (18% of all fatal distracted-driving crashes).

People driving light trucks and motorcyclists had the highest percentage of total drivers reported as distracted at the time of fatal crashes (12% each).

A teen driver riding with one other passenger doubles the risk of being involved in a fatal car crash. With two or more passengers, the risk increases to five times as likely.

Research reveals that 46% of drivers under 18 admit to texting while driving. Driver distraction is a factor in 25- to 50% of all car accidents, with 61% of teen drivers admitting to risky driving habits.

In 2009, the South had the highest percentage of cell phone use while driving at 6%. The Northeast came in at 4%.

Teen Driver Cell Phone and Text Messaging Statistics

Despite the risks, the majority of teen drivers ignore cell phone driving restrictions.

In 2007, driver distractions, such as using a cell phone or text messaging, contributed to nearly 1,000 crashes involving 16- and 17-year-old drivers.

Over 60 percent of American teens admit to risky driving, and nearly half of those that admit to risky driving also admit to text messaging behind the wheel.

Each year, 21% of fatal car crashes involving teenagers between the ages of 16 and 19 were the result of cell phone usage. This result has been expected to grow as much as 4% every year.

Almost 50% of all drivers between the ages of 18 and 24 are texting while driving.

Over one-third of all young drivers, ages 24 and under, are texting on the road.

Teens say that texting is their number one driver distraction.

Adult Driver Cell Phone, Texting, and Car Accident Information

Talking on a cell phone causes nearly 25% of car accidents.

One-fifth of experienced adult drivers in the United States send text messages while driving.

A study of dangerous driver behavior released in January 2007 by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. found that of 1,200 surveyed drivers, 73 percent talk on cell phones while driving.

The same 2007 survey found that 19 percent of motorists say they text message while driving.

In 2005, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found that ten percent of drivers are on hand-held or hands free cell phones at any given hour of the day.

A study conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Motorists found that motorists who use cell phones while driving are four times more likely to get into crashes serious enough to injure themselves.

In 2002, the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis calculated that 2,600 people die each year as a result of using cellphones while driving. They estimated that another 330,000 are injured.

According to the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, drivers talking on cell phones are 18 percent slower to react to brake lights. They also take 17 percent longer to regain the speed they lost when they braked.

An estimated 44 percent of American drivers now have cell phones in their automobiles.

Of cell phone users that were surveyed, 85 percent said they use their phones occasionally when driving, 30 percent use their phones while driving on the highway, and 27 percent use them during half or more of the trips they take.

84 percent of cell phone users stated that they believe using a cell phone while driving increases the risk of being in an accident.

The majority of Americans believe that talking on the phone and texting are two of the most dangerous behaviors that occur behind the wheel. Still, as many as 81% of drivers admit to making phone calls while driving.

The number of crashes and near-crashes linked to dialing is nearly identical to the number associated with talking or listening. Dialing is more dangerous but occurs less often than talking or listening.

Studies have found that texting while driving causes a 400 percent increase in time spent with eyes off the road.

Study Reveals the Dangers of Texting While Driving

The following statistics come from a study conducted by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI):

Of all cell phone related tasks – including talking, dialing, or reaching for the phone – texting while driving is the most dangerous.

Teen drivers are four times more likely than adults to get into car crashes or near crash events directly related to talking on a cell phone or texting.

A car driver dialing a cell phone is 2.8 times more likely to get into a crash than a non-distracted driver.

A driver reaching for a cell phone or any other electronic device is 1.4 times more likely to experience a car crash.

A car driver talking on their phone is 1.3 times more likely to get into an accident.

A truck driver texting while driving is 23.2 times more likely to get into an accident than a trucker paying full attention to the road.

A truck driver dialing a cell is 5.9 times more likely to crash.

A trucker reaching for a phone or other device is 6.7 times more likely to experience a truck accident.

For every 6 seconds of drive time, a driver sending or receiving a text message spends 4.6 of those seconds with their eyes off the road. This makes texting the most distracting of all cell phone related tasks.

Pennsylvania Cell Phone Car Crash Stats

In Pennsylvania, although there are no laws regarding talking on the cell or sending text messages while driving, there are emerging statistics that show the connection between cell phone use and car wrecks.

There were 23,059 crashes involving 16- to 19-year-olds in 2008, resulting in 194 deaths. Driver distraction contributed to about 10% of them, but the number could be much higher.

In Pennsylvania, there were 1,298 cell phone related accidents in 2008. Of those accidents, 9 resulted in death.

From 2003 to 2006, car accidents from cell phone use lead to 50 deaths across the state of Pennsylvania.

Cell phone-related car accidents shot up 43 percent in western Pennsylvania from 2003 to 2006.

A normal, undistracted driver fails to notice an important road event (like another driver mistake) 3% of the time. An adult dialing a cell phone misses that event 13% of the time, and a teenager dialing a cell phone misses it 53% of the time.

According to PennDOT, from 2002 to 2006 there were 5,715 car accidents linked to the use of hand-held cell phones in PA.

PennDOT also reports 367 accidents in the same time period involving hands free cell phones or Bluetooth communication devices.

In 2004 alone, hand-held cell phone use contributed to over 1,170 Pennsylvania car crashes.

Accidents involving talking or texting on a cell phone rose from 168 in 2003 to 228 in 2005 in the Western Pennsylvania region. That’s a 36 percent increase in over two years.

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

Determined criminals and wackos generally are not stopped by laws.A law does not have the ability to remove illegal weapons off the streets,anymore than they successfully remove drugs. Regardless of any laws passed innocents will be killed by those without regard for all the laws you want passed.

She's righter than she's ever been, Tom.

I'll accept that as a true statement... (Should I or should I not.... hmmm... such low hanging fruit... ) The bar need not be very high to make that claim. A clock stuck on midnight is righter than at any other time of the day at the stroke of midnight...

Really is that the best excuse that anyone can come up with. It is conceding defeat. It is a lame excuse. A cop out. It is easier to obtain a gun than many other far less lethal and dangerous things in life. We regulate many activities far more that have much less significant consequences.

What do you think the result would be if we threw up our hands and responded the same way about driving while drunk? "Oh well, judgment impaired drinkers are going to get drunk and get behind the wheel of a vehicle no matter what laws we pass. So why bother to get tougher."

[bonnie]

I'll accept that as a true statement... (Should I or should I not.... hmmm... such low hanging fruit... )

[Guest]

(Should I or should I not.... hmmm... such low hanging fruit... )

Ok, maybe I should re-phrase it.

Bonnie is right, and you are wrong. There I said it. It's out there. Yaaaaaaay bonnie!!

[bonnie]

Ok, maybe I should re-phrase it.

Bonnie is right, and you are wrong. There I said it. It's out there. Yaaaaaaay bonnie!!

What puzzles me and maybe it shouldn't but the SDA's that are so quick to yell,"There ought to be a law"

We are a nation of laws.The passing of more and more laws seems to make people feel good."Now,there we have done something" All the time appearing ignorant of what is going on around us,"Just pass that law"

While we need to protect those we logically can,less and less will laws help us. Why do so many of us seem puzzled by the violence and the direction this country is headed.We should know by now the unfortunate role that the US will play in first restricting freedoms and then persecution.

The Sunday law will not just suddenly appear,even today I don't think it could be done with a "government proclamation". When enough laws are passed that are for the "good of us" as the government knows best,it will be a slam dunk.

When people come to the conclusion we we have so many problems because they have spent decades kicking the mere mention of God out of everything,"God" their style will be brought back with a vengence and with it persecution.

Know one knows the time of Christs return,but most of us realize the time can not be that far off. What is short to God may not seem like a short time to us,but it is coming and we are being prepared.Some want to prepare the government way.

The following is just what we have today and it is growing worse day by day

The Days of Noah

by John J. Parsons

"For just as the days of Noah were, in the same way will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away.... Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot - they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all - so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed" (Matt. 24:38-9; Luke 17:28-30).

What were these "days of Noah" like? What can we say about dor Ha-Mabul, the "Generation of the Flood"? In a word, Yeshua told us that this generation was asleep, blind, ignorant, unaware.... For ten consecutive generations -- from the creation of Adam until the generation of Noah -- people progressively became more and more ignorant of spiritual reality and truth. Eating and drinking, romantic intrigue and marriage, buying and selling, and other wordly affairs were the preoccupations of the day. People lived lives in abysmal ignorance of the spiritual reality around them. They "forgot" who God was, who they were, why they existed, and where they were going. In short, they were "unaware."

Spiritual blindness eventually leads to corruption and outright violence. Of Noah's generation it was written that "the earth was corrupt before God, and filled with violence" (Gen. 6:11). Rashi understood the word "corruption" (shachat) to mean sexual immorality (i.e., idolatry) and "violence" (chamas) to mean robbery. In general, however, the sages regarded the word chamas to refer to lawlessness, i.e., the condition of living without yirat ha-shamayim (awe of heaven). When we are spiritually dead, we are unconscious of the wonder of God....

[Guest]

Let's do all we can not to die spiritually.

[bonnie]

Let's do all we can not to die spiritually.

What I don't quite understand is that any of us believe that passing a new law or ban is going to impress the wacko bent on mass murder.It would of course restrict those that aren't planning anything illegal

These people don't give a fig for the illegality. They will not change plans and decide not to go to a school and kill a bunch of kids because they can't legally obtain a assault rifle.

They don't plan on getting out alive so what is the biggy about breaking the law to obtain an illegal weapon?

Only a very small percentage of crimes are committed with the weapon everyone is so hysterical about.

Despite their overwhelming popularity, assault weapons like the rifle used by the Sandy Hook Elementary killer are very rarely used in crimes, according to a comprehensive Congressional Research Service report on guns and gun control legislation.

Citing a survey of 203,300 state and federal prisoners who were armed during the crime for which they were incarcerated, "fewer than 1 in 50, or less than 2 percent, used, carried, or possessed a semiautomatic assault weapon," said the report.

The weapons, however, are at the center of President Obama's bid to put in place new gun control rules following the Connecticut killings last week. His effort, backed by gun-control Democrats, is expected to lead to a new proposal to ban the weapons and also crack down on gun sales throughout the nation.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...

[Guest]

It's the liberal mind set, and I've never understood it. Or how otherwise intelligent people, seemingly, could fall for such nonsense.

[bonnie]

It's the liberal mind set, and I've never understood it. Or how otherwise intelligent people, seemingly, could fall for such nonsense.

Now that just might get you labeled a "low hanging fruit" You are not in agreement with those that consider themselves so brilliant