Posted by 2nd Amendment Supporter, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Dec 15, 2012 at 5:03 pm
You're right, A Neighbor.
I posted elsewhere on this site how terrible I feel for the victims, families, and Community. I neglected to repeat my post on this thread. My oversite.
I have the same goal as those who want to ban guns. I want a safe America for kids and everyone. But I have a high regard for the valid and reliable social research of John Lott, unlike the previous poster.
His data is hard, if not impossible to refute.
As a sidebar, I have family from Littleton, Colorado where Columbine High School is ... and am hypersensitive to these issues. I once was against the 2nd Amendment but have switched my views 180 degrees after thorough research.
I will be praying for the families of these precious kids.
Posted by Noreen, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Dec 15, 2012 at 5:04 pm
The 'dude' has the moral maturity of a 10 year-old boy. Gets off on cowboy and indian society with lots of shoot-em ups, and he sees himself as the hero. Likes the idea of a violent society because it 'legitimates' his own sick, violent fantasies.
Posted by Guest, a resident of another community, on Dec 15, 2012 at 5:58 pm
This whole issue of having less or more gun control isn't going to solve anything. We could have less or more guns out in society and it wouldn't do any good. I think accidental shootings at home may raise, as we live in a society where people don't take proper responsibility of locking guns up. However, I do believe that all gun owners in this nation need to be background checked/finger printed, attend mandatory gun training classes, as well as be checked out by a psychologist somehow. There's also a lot of power hungry people in this world and in our country that shouldn't be carrying a gun. At least if an attacker is using a knife or bat, you can fight. Where as with a gun it's boom and your shot.
The issue of gun violence goes a lot deeper. Too many mentally ill people walking around this world without ever receiving the proper medical attention.
Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore, on Dec 15, 2012 at 7:58 pm
anybody with a gun is capable of killing others and i wouldn't assume that they are all mentally ill...even if one doesn't own a gun it's easy to buy one...if people get angry enough and decide to take out innocent others, it's possible...
not quite sure what you mean by "mentally ill"...?
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Dec 15, 2012 at 9:40 pm
"2nd Amendment" wrote: "... But I have a high regard for the valid and reliable social research of John Lott, unlike the previous poster."
Curious about John Lott, I looked him up. Here's some of what a Wikipedia article on him says:
"As part of the dispute surrounding the missing survey, Lott created and used "Mary Rosh" as a fake persona to defend his own works on Usenet and elsewhere. After investigative work by blogger Julian Sanchez, Lott admitted to use of the Rosh persona. Sanchez also pointed out that Lott, posing as Rosh, not only praised his own academic writing, but also called himself "the best professor I ever had". (Web Link)
Sorry, but I don't have a very high regard for the character of this person.
Posted by Noreen, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Dec 16, 2012 at 1:32 am
Yes, Sam, given the dubious quality of Lott's work, it's amazing that anyone would cite him.
I heard him on a radio station the other night on a talk show with a moderator who was open to the suggestion that the Columbine shooters as well as Connecticutt's recent shooter were programed (by gun control advocates) through special video games to kill kids so that America would cry out for more gun control. (I was driving through a rural part of Cal, the central valley and my listening options were limited.)
The moderator and John Lott discussed (1) how the mentally deranged young men who resort to killing a mass of innocents are doing it as an act of "glorious suicide" and that (2) had the kids been armed, the mentally deranged ones wouldn't have engaged in this violence because, hey, the mentally deranged ones don't want to get shot. Of course, (2) is negated by (1).
It is this kind of "reasoning" that has led to John Lott being the laughingstock of academia. One has to wonder about the mental stability of anyone who would embrace Lott's views and think of them as empirically validated. Note the correlation between the sickness of one or more of the regular posters on these sites and, of course, their espoused advocacy of our need for more guns and relaxed gun control laws. That's a pretty chilling thought, if you ask me. It's enough to ensure that I remain anonymous while posting on these sites; for some of these posters take themselves way way far too seriously.
Posted by Noreen, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Dec 16, 2012 at 10:12 am
Yep, too intellectually deficient to actually engage in an argument. Just an ad from a Tea Party/KKK site along with violent imagery. Yep, let's all become like Israel. Isn't that a cheery prospect?
I'd love to be able to laugh at the same TeaPee/KKKers were the state to start arming public school teachers. Can you imagine the clamor over militant socialist state? But of course we're dealing with intellectual midgets here.
Posted by hoops, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on Dec 16, 2012 at 10:21 am
The problem is not owning guns.The problem is being able to own assault rifles and the like.Any reasonable sane human being should be able to agree to owning a hand gun for protection and a rifle that is appropriate for hunting.That should be the end of it.Everything else is banned with severe punishments.
The gun lobby should be ashamed for going beyond that.
Posted by Boreen, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Dec 16, 2012 at 7:08 pm
Yes, intellectually deficient is an apt description for your debating style, noreen. Note the inability to reference the Tea Party without the frenzied, psychotic name calling of KKK, as though her rambling rant had some relevance.
The waiting period for gun ownership was aimed at nuts like you. Hopefully, this tragedy will result in more adequate and proactive psychological screening so people like Noreen are never able to legally possess guns. Of course, she could always buy a gun on the black market, assuming she can accumulate enough food stamp funds to purchase a weapon.
Posted by Noreen, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Dec 16, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Very well thought out and carefully reasoned argument, Boreen. Worthy of some of the best kkk logic I've ever read. You certainly do your kkk comrades justice. Tea Party? KKK? The stink of illogic and hatred is identical.
Your assignment for this week, Boreen/2ndASs/Steve, is to stand out on Main Street with a poster that advocates arming public school teachers in the classroom. I'm certain you'll elicit much uptake, and that your fellow kkkers probably won't even recognize the contradiction.
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Dec 16, 2012 at 9:18 pm
"2nd Amendment" wrote: "Kumbiya you hopeless liberal. When will you peaceniks realize that to have peace, you must be prepared for war. It is called history."
Well, "2nd", it didn't take you long to change from your lofty prose of your first post here to the childish taunts of your latest post, did it? Kind of surprised how quickly you allowed yourself to be unmasked.
As for your claim that to have peace one must be prepared for war, that comes from an old Roman quote that referred to military strategy with hostile states. It was never meant to be applied to internal relationships within a civilized society. Peaceful relationships within a civilized society does not and should not depend on my having a bigger weapons arsenal than that of my neighbors.
Posted by 2nd Amendment Supporter, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Dec 16, 2012 at 9:46 pm
Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree Sam.
I also sense that many parents of those innocent children who were gunned down would have given anything if someone at Sandy Hook were armed to defend against that madman.
Given your quote... "As for your claim that to have peace one must be prepared for war, that comes from an old Roman quote that referred to military strategy with hostile states. It was never meant to be applied to internal relationships within a civilized society. Peaceful relationships within a civilized society does not and should not depend on my having a bigger weapons arsenal than that of my neighbors."
That town and Sandy Hook are about as civilized as you can get. Yet, this didn't help them much did it. And BTW: Did you catch that the police ... which have an office less than 3 miles away...took 20 MINUTES to respond! With that amount of time, I am surprised the shooter didn't cause even more mayhem.
An armed society spends more time stopping evil than contemplating it. It is the disarmed society that is always contemplating it as a thing beyond its control.
I am done with this thread as both you and your flaming liberal friend Noreen and I have our heels dug in with our respective positions. You and Noreen can choose unpreparedness and I choose to protect my family. Good luck.
Posted by liberalism is a disease, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Dec 18, 2012 at 9:56 am liberalism is a disease is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
Noreen, what's with your hostility towards the dem-inspired KKK? Are racist left leaning organizations like the KKK (Robert Byrd's legacy) somehow responsible for the rampage in CT? Your anger management issues show right through your posts as does your inability to engage without hostile name calling and insinuations. You make a great case for mental health screening to prevent violent outbursts like the one in CT. I hope you don't won any guns and if you do, you should consider keeping them inside your trailer.