Jeans and T-shirt comments

Posted in: 316 people are shot every day in America. Here are 5 stories See in context

Please expand on that.

No.

Right, because it's a ridiculously sweeping, borderline offensive generalisation. My mother owns a gun. She's an avid sportshooter and has a .22lr for pest control on the farm. She also volunteers at the local decile 10 school library and her church group. She's also never broken a law in her life.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Posted in: 316 people are shot every day in America. Here are 5 stories See in context

Takeda,

Good points, but surely removing guns from circulation is designed to decrease gun crime immediately. 60,000 were taken back, to no obvious effect. Fewer guns, less gun crime, right?

Let's target the criminals and let alone law-abiding gun owners. The only problem is, how do you tell the difference?

The criminals are the ones breaking the law, and with a history of such.

1) A pike in gun crime doesn't mean gun control doesn't work.

It isn't a spike. It was increasing beforehand. At best one can say it was ineffective.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Posted in: 316 people are shot every day in America. Here are 5 stories See in context

lol No you don't. No meaningful legislation has been passed. Republicans don't want to pass any sort of gun control.

They don't want to pass legislation that targets lawful gun owners as opposed to criminals. New Zealand did that; taking some types of semi-autos away from hunters and farmers, while the crims carried on undeterred. By all accounts, there was no effect on gun crime. You could even say it increased.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/416881/rates-of-gun-crimes-and-killings-using-guns-at-highest-levels-in-a-decade

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Posted in: 316 people are shot every day in America. Here are 5 stories See in context

without guns 

I apologize. I'll have to adjust my definition of that word. Without now means with a certain number.

So yes, Americans have accepted this number of deaths per day is acceptable. They just don't like to have it pointed out, because it doesn't allow them to continue the illusion that there is no cost of life for the right for them to arm themselves.

Right. Just ignore the facts and figures presented in my post showing majority support for gun control.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Posted in: 316 people are shot every day in America. Here are 5 stories See in context

In this context "no guns" means of course that they're not rampant on the streets and readily available to the general population

So 'no guns' means 'some guns.' If you're going to debate, say what you mean.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Posted in: 316 people are shot every day in America. Here are 5 stories See in context

Americans have decided this is an acceptable number of people to die per day, so that they can carry guns to protect themselves.

Sure, Americans recognize self defence as a valid reason for ownership, but that doesn't mean they 'accept' such a high level of gun violence.

According to Statista.com, overall, 68% of Americans strongly support or somewhat support more gun control.  Especially “(p)olicies for more funding for mental health screening and treatment, mandatory background checks and licensing for gun purchases, and passage of a national “red-flag” law.” 16% of Republicans and 75% of democrats strongly support these laws, and 18% of democrats somewhat support them, vs 26% of republicans. A PBS NewsHour, NPR and Marist poll said that, “When asked to choose, 55 percent of U.S. adults said the nation needs to prioritize controlling gun violence, compared to 39 percent of Americans who said they preferred protecting gun rights.” Support is stronger for proposed laws that regulate WHO can get firearms, as opposed to WHAT kind of firearms they can get. This is because while more homicides and mass shootings are carried out with handguns, a lot of legislation focuses on so-called ‘assault rifles’ which are responsible for approximately 2% of gun homicides. Proposed bans of these kinds of firearms receive about 50% support.

A strong part of elected President Biden’s platform was gun reform, and he has already signed six (?) executive orders regarding gun control, which is about all he can do without majority support in the senate. Some states have increased (or introduced legislation to increase) funding for research into causes, effects and preventive measures of gun violence. Finally, in the 2021-2022 senate session, there are 98 anti-gun proposals compared to 42 pro-gun proposals. This suggests that America has far from decided it’s ok with gun violence.

https://www.thetrace.org/2019/01/state-gun-violence-research-california-new-jersey/

https://amgoa.org/Proposed-Federal-Firearm-Legislation

https://www.statista.com/statistics/811780/support-for-stricter-gun-control-laws-in-the-us/

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/most-americans-support-stricter-gun-laws-new-poll-says

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Posted in: 316 people are shot every day in America. Here are 5 stories See in context

The vast majority of the world lives without guns just fine.

In which countries are there no guns?

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

Posted in: 316 people are shot every day in America. Here are 5 stories See in context

If you have a gun, you are the bad guy.

Please expand on that.

-7 ( +6 / -13 )

Posted in: 8 people wounded in shooting near Fort Worth car wash See in context

This is well-documented fact.

Can you provide some of that documentation?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Posted in: 8 people wounded in shooting near Fort Worth car wash See in context

Most of those wounded were innocent bystanders, police said.

Two people get into an argument, and eight people end up getting shot. What a dangerous place.

Police said multiple people in the area then returned fire.

It's a good thing there were good guys with guns on hand to shoot innocent bystanders.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Posted in: Ireland edge Japan 39-31 in 9-try thriller in Dublin See in context

Much better game than the All Blacks v Tonga debacle earlier in the day. No disrespect to Tonga as they played the hand they were dealt.

Couple more games together against quality opposition like Ireland and BIL, and the Blossoms will be looking okay to go one step further in 2023.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Posted in: 11 people in custody after hourslong armed standoff on I-95 in Massachusetts See in context

Nope, I read that. I just didn’t expect gun supporters to give a hoot about gun laws.

Well that's the misconception, isn't it? Most gun owners respect the laws, and do their best to follow them. They just get frustrated when laws place undue burdens on lawful gun-owners, and/or do nothing to keep guns away from criminals. Case in point New Zealand's gun buy back which took rifles away from farmers and hunters while the gangs carried on unaffected.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Posted in: 11 people in custody after hourslong armed standoff on I-95 in Massachusetts See in context

Oops, posted too soon.

...is not consistent with the firearms laws that we have in Massachusetts,” Mason said

I'm sure Mass State Police Col. Christopher Mason knows the laws far better than I do.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: 11 people in custody after hourslong armed standoff on I-95 in Massachusetts See in context

“As specified multiple times to the police that we are abiding by the peaceful journey laws of the United States.”

I hope they did their homework on that. Those laws vary by state, and you have to abide by the laws of the states you're travelling from, to, and through, or else it's a felony. Massachusetts requires a non-resident permit, for example.

Mason said he understood the suspects, who did not have firearms licenses, have a different perspective on the law.

"Massachusetts honors the federal FOPA laws as long as the person is traveling through Massachusetts has a non-residence permit for Massachusetts, otherwise it is a felony. The state also has it's own peaceable journey statute which is very restrictive."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: Infant shot in head among 7 wounded in Chicago shooting See in context

"...shall not be infringed."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Lions captain Jones injured in 28-10 win over Japan See in context

I don't think the Springboks will be too concerned after that Lions performance. Shame about Wyn Jones.

Japan seemed to click a bit better in the second half after some terrible defending in the first, and had the superior fitness. Some good runs by Matsushima and Tatafu, who bumped Dan Biggar out of the way.

I think Michael Leich is now well past his sell by date

I had the same thought, but I think his experience and captaincy are still assets to the team.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Posted in: New Zealand plans stronger hate speech laws See in context

All it takes is one such idiot and your gun rights will be trampled upon.

In New Zealand, gun ownership was never a right, but a privilege. And I'm saying this as a person whose family had to sell back their semi-automatic rifles (tools of the farming trade) to the government because of that idiot.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Posted in: New Zealand plans stronger hate speech laws See in context

You are going to lose your mind when you discover what context is.

That's a fair point, but comments are taken out of context all the time, accidentally or on purpose. And it can be pretty hard to prove intent.

Until there is a clear guideline what is hate speech and what not, such laws are prone to misuse.

Exactly.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Posted in: NZ brings back restrictions in Wellington after COVID scare from Sydney visitor See in context

anon9999,

Panic in NZ with 1 infected person on a plane.

No, panic would be a full, nationwide lockdown. This response is rather measured.

This highlights the different way of handling the virus between NZ and other countries

It sure does. Large parts of Japan have been under a 'quasi' state of emergency for months. New Zealand's "last positive case due to community transmission (was) reported about four months ago."

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Posted in: Japanese soccer star Kumi Yokoyama comes out as transgender man See in context

Not if he's gay.

*they're

Your question is like asking which way is north while standing on the north pole. It has no meaning or context.

I thought that was a good example, too. When Neil deGrasse Tyson came up with it.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Posted in: Japanese soccer star Kumi Yokoyama comes out as transgender man See in context

And their decision affects me in no way, shape, or form. I say good for them.

They should now compete against the men, though.

-4 ( +8 / -12 )

Posted in: Australian PM promises more COVID-19 shots to states as Sydney cluster grows See in context

Looks like those strict lockdowns aren’t working.

A handful of cases in a country of 26 million is proof that Australia's lockdowns AREN'T working?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: Why the 2nd Amendment protects a 'well-regulated militia' but not a private citizen militia See in context

You cited a decision from a court circuit, which may not be the correct interpretation. Do you understand how the US legal system works? It's fine if you don't. Most people aren't lawyers.

This isn't my fight, but I think you've mistaken the name of the case (District of Columbia vs Heller) for the court in which it was held, which was the Supreme Court of the United States.

An incorrect interpretation it may be, but it's the one against which related laws should be measured.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Why the 2nd Amendment protects a 'well-regulated militia' but not a private citizen militia See in context

Cool citation of a case from over a decade ago that's not federal law, my dude. 

No, you're obfuscating. The Heller decision provides the current federal interpretation of the Second Amendment as to who has the right to bear arms. It was decided in Heller that it protects a right to possess a firearm unconnected to military service and that individuals are free to use such weapons for “traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home,” as stated in this article. And later in McDonald vs Chicago (2010) the Supreme Court ruled that the right to bear arms extended to state and local government as well as federal. That's not in dispute.

Any laws on the books denying that right ecould be struck off as unconstitutional if challenged, as happened in California. Subject to appeal.

The question raised by this case is the one about militias. Is 'every able bodied male over the age of 17' a militia member, or only national guards.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Posted in: Why the 2nd Amendment protects a 'well-regulated militia' but not a private citizen militia See in context

And how many times have guns been used by american citizens to "protect themselves from a tyrannical governement

They were used to overthrow one in 1775. Anyway, how many times has your house burned down? If the answer is one (or none even), does that mean you should get rid of your smoke alarms and fire exinguishers?

If the founders were alive today, I believe they would be very concerned – because the Constitution is clear that the only militias protected by the Second Amendment are “well-regulated” units authorized and controlled by state governments, not a private citizen militia.

Depends on the definition of 'well-regulated'. Does that mean under a specific command structure and regularly drilled, or simply armed appropriately and able to muster? In most states in colonial America, all able-bodied men were considered to be part of the militia. And I'm not so sure how the founders would feel today. There were state constitutions penned before the Bill of Rights that recognised the formation of private militias. Pennsylvania's (1790) said "the right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the State shall not be questioned," and Vermont's, (1777), said "the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State." Also, groups of citizens often banded together for defense of towns and homesteads against natives, and played important roles in the French and Indian Wars.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Posted in: Man pulls gun at Florida Starbucks over cream cheese See in context

Small brains and guns go hand in hand!!!

Yes. All soldiers, police officers, security personnel, hunters, ranchers, farmers, Olympians, sport shooters, collectors, antiques dealers, firearms instructors, vets, pest controllers, and TV and movie armorers have small brains.

Small brains and people who threaten drive-thru workers with guns over cream cheese. THAT goes hand in hand.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Posted in: Motive sought for fatal string of Arizona freeway shootings See in context

Tricarico told police that an "unknown male" pointed a gun at the suspect at a car wash Thursday morning, after which Tricarico then allegedly bought ammunition for his AR-15-style rifle, according to the court documents.

He allegedly told police that in one of the shooting incidents, a pedestrian shot at him "so he shot back," and in a second incident, a man in a car pointed a handgun at him "so he shot back at him."

Arizona shooting spree suspect thought people were after him for prior shooting: Police - ABC News (go.com)

Is it me or does the mere presence of guns encourage more shooting?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Posted in: Motive sought for fatal string of Arizona freeway shootings See in context

*Of the total 3,188 firearms deaths, 71% were suicide, 23% were homicide, 5% were undetermined and 1% were unintentional.*

That statistic is quite consistent across the United States (I believe suicides by firearm account for two-thirds of all firearm deaths) so I think Desert Tortoise's point that "deaths by firearm (in Arizona) per 10,000 people is about double the rate of California" still applies when suicides are stripped out. I couldn't find stats for California specifically, though.

Right, but several other people were also shot and injured, just as the armed guy was. So it doesn't seem like guns saved anyone.

Three shooting victims survived (including the victim who returned fire) and about 10 were otherwise injured. So the percentage of survivors who shot back is what? 8%?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: Bear shot dead after rampaging through Sapporo See in context

garypen,

That's all true, but it depends on the situation. Tranquilising requires monitoring and tracking after an initial dose as it's not immediately effective. This is fine if the animal isn't near people. A zoo animal or an animal in the woods or on the savannah, for example. Also if the animal isn't particularly dangerous, like a deer, or has been otherwise captured or contained. In this case, the bear was in a built up area and had already injured four people.

I think the 'hollywood' comments are against people assuming a decision was made to immediately exterminate the animal. On the contrary, it seems they'd considered other options before settling on extermination.

coordinating efforts to capture the brown bear, or if deemed necessary, exterminate it."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: Bear shot dead after rampaging through Sapporo See in context

I wager though the authorities dropped the ball, complacently.

I guess they might bear some responsibility.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites


©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.