Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

3 cops shot inside police station in New Jersey.


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 28 December 2012 - 11:50 AM

*
POPULAR

http://www.foxnews.c...police-station/

If only they armed the police we wouldn't have this kind of thing...

  • 5

#2 Stefan

Stefan

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,390 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 03

Posted 28 December 2012 - 12:09 PM

Police should carry assault rifles rather than pistols
  • 0

gallery_9059_470_12899.jpg


(1 Peter 2:18)

Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse.



 

#3 Denguin

Denguin

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,526 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 08

Posted 28 December 2012 - 12:11 PM

http://www.foxnews.c...police-station/

If only they armed the police we wouldn't have this kind of thing...

Actually it seems like the suspect in custody gained possession of one of the officer's firearms.

So technically, having the need for no guns on police officers (i.e. UK) with much better gun control would have prevented this whole fiasco.

I wonder what the NRA will have to say about this.
  • 0

#4 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,739 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 28 December 2012 - 12:28 PM

Remember that string of zombie-like attacks?

I liked that storyline better than these ho-hum shootings.
  • 0
Posted Image

#5 Bombastik der Teutone

Bombastik der Teutone

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,922 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 07

Posted 28 December 2012 - 01:16 PM

whats up there lately?

kids
firefighters
policemen


whats next?
  • 0

#6 Mr.Habitat

Mr.Habitat

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,602 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 03

Posted 28 December 2012 - 01:18 PM

It's the tea party
  • 0

#7 MC Fatigue

MC Fatigue

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,568 posts
  • Joined: 13-March 12

Posted 28 December 2012 - 01:20 PM

lets not make any rash judgements until we hear the NRA press release...
:picard:

Edited by MC Fatigue, 28 December 2012 - 01:21 PM.

  • 0
" I don't understand, can somebody tell me what's going on? Why is there a drunk Chinese man doing push-ups on my front lawn?......and why's he wearing lipstick??"

#8 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,550 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 28 December 2012 - 01:56 PM

whats up there lately?

kids
firefighters
policemen


whats next?

Don't forget church goers.

I though police checked their weapons when in the station, as in put them in a secure location to avoid this kind of thing. I guess only some do, or I just watch too much TV/movies.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#9 Dellins

Dellins

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,708 posts
  • Joined: 14-April 09

Posted 28 December 2012 - 02:15 PM

Assign an armed guard to each police officer.

Edited by Dellins, 28 December 2012 - 02:16 PM.

  • 2

#10 Lancaster

Lancaster

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,425 posts
  • Joined: 03-September 12

Posted 28 December 2012 - 05:58 PM

The one non-interchangeable factor is all these gun related events is mental illness.
  • 0

#11 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 28 December 2012 - 06:30 PM

Americans are crazy.
  • 0

#12 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,179 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 28 December 2012 - 06:37 PM

He was brought back to police headquarters and when his handcuffs were removed for a brief period during processing, he lunged at Burns, knocking her down and taking her weapon, police Chief Harry Earle said.



Clearly it's the gun's fault this cop was a moron.
  • 1

#13 surtur

surtur

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Joined: 19-March 10

Posted 28 December 2012 - 06:47 PM

oh i see he got them with the old "my cuffs are to tight can you loosen them a bit for me" routine . classic.
  • 0
Release The KraKassian
Posted Image

#14 NightHawkSniper

NightHawkSniper

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,320 posts
  • Joined: 18-February 10

Posted 28 December 2012 - 06:49 PM

Actually it seems like the suspect in custody gained possession of one of the officer's firearms.

So technically, having the need for no guns on police officers (i.e. UK) with much better gun control would have prevented this whole fiasco.

I wonder what the NRA will have to say about this.


Clearly they needed to upgrade their pistols to the one similar in Skyfall...
  • 0

5577747361_37d631069c_m.jpg
 


#15 cadillaccts

cadillaccts

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,533 posts
  • Joined: 10-October 07

Posted 28 December 2012 - 06:56 PM

Clearly they need more guns.
  • 0

#16 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 29 December 2012 - 08:19 AM

[/size][/font][/color]

Clearly it's the gun's fault this cop was a moron.


And these are trained police officers. Arming teachers etc who will have weekend training...yeah, dumb.
  • 0

#17 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,633 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 29 December 2012 - 11:22 AM

And these are trained police officers. Arming teachers etc who will have weekend training...yeah, dumb.


Most cops recieve minimal training the use of force, and they have the big disadvantages of having to get close to suspects in order to physically control them, and also in having their sidearms dangling out in a holster when not in hand.

That's why such a sizeable percentage of cops that are shot are shot with their own guns.

There are lots of American prison inmates who constantly practice how to snatch a gun from a cop.

There are police "retention" holsters which require someone to press a button or lever to unlock the gun, though remembering that extra step requires extra training and most cops don't get enough as is.

Anyway I wonder if the department is now going to get sued for not issueing retention holsters, or maybe the gun company for not doing enough to allow unaurhorized use of their pistols?


  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#18 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,179 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 29 December 2012 - 11:59 AM

And these are trained police officers. Arming teachers etc who will have weekend training...yeah, dumb.

0/10

Most cops recieve minimal training the use of force, and they have the big disadvantages of having to get close to suspects in order to physically control them, and also in having their sidearms dangling out in a holster when not in hand.

That's why such a sizeable percentage of cops that are shot are shot with their own guns.

There are lots of American prison inmates who constantly practice how to snatch a gun from a cop.

There are police "retention" holsters which require someone to press a button or lever to unlock the gun, though remembering that extra step requires extra training and most cops don't get enough as is.

Anyway I wonder if the department is now going to get sued for not issueing retention holsters, or maybe the gun company for not doing enough to allow unaurhorized use of their pistols?

You gave an awful post the dignity of a good response. :(
  • 0

#19 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,589 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 29 December 2012 - 01:06 PM

Most cops recieve minimal training the use of force, and they have the big disadvantages of having to get close to suspects in order to physically control them, and also in having their sidearms dangling out in a holster when not in hand.

That's why such a sizeable percentage of cops that are shot are shot with their own guns.

There are lots of American prison inmates who constantly practice how to snatch a gun from a cop.

There are police "retention" holsters which require someone to press a button or lever to unlock the gun, though remembering that extra step requires extra training and most cops don't get enough as is.

Anyway I wonder if the department is now going to get sued for not issueing retention holsters, or maybe the gun company for not doing enough to allow unaurhorized use of their pistols?


If you can steal a gun from a cop so easily, imagine how easy it would be to steal one from the 60 year old English Teacher at the local school.
  • 0
Posted Image

#20 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,633 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 29 December 2012 - 01:21 PM

If you can steal a gun from a cop so easily, imagine how easy it would be to steal one from the 60 year old English Teacher at the local school.


You don't hear of armed civilians having their gun taken away from them and used against them very often, its a different scenario, for one thing they usually carry their guns concealed, where the attacker is going to have a lot harder time grabbing it even if he knows its there.

Also, a civilian is not going to be cuffing, uncuffing or otherwise controlling somebody.
  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#21 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,589 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 29 December 2012 - 01:36 PM

You don't hear of armed civilians having their gun taken away from them and used against them very often, its a different scenario, for one thing they usually carry their guns concealed, where the attacker is going to have a lot harder time grabbing it even if he knows its there.

Also, a civilian is not going to be cuffing, uncuffing or otherwise controlling somebody.


You honestly think that an assailant wouldn't be able to rush a poorly trained teacher and take their weapon? After all, they know that the teacher will be armed.
Of course why would they even need to do that when they could just shoot them right away and take their ammo for later when they run out of their own?

I guess this comes down to your faith in teacher or another civilian actually being able to shoot and disable a threat (probably better equipped and protected), and not have any other incidents arise as a result of them having a weapon. I have almost zero faith in that happening.

Edited by Jägermeister, 29 December 2012 - 01:44 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#22 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 29 December 2012 - 01:38 PM

You honestly think that an assailant wouldn't be able to rush a poorly trained teacher and take their weapon? After all, they know that the teacher will be armed.
Of course why would they even need to do that when they could just shoot them right away and take their ammo for later when they run out of their own?


Perhaps arming students would work better, eh?

Washington state appeals court judges had lots of questions for lawyers at a hearing about whether a gun owner should be prosecuted in a Bremerton school shooting that critically injured a 9-year-old girl.

Kitsap County prosecutors charged Douglas Bauer because he owns the pistol his girlfriend's son took to Armin Jahr Elementary. It fired through the boy's backpack, critically wounding Amina Kocer-Bowman in a classroom. Amina spent six weeks in a hospital and endured numerous surgeries for internal injuries caused by the shooting.

Bauer's lawyer, Wayne Fricke, told the judges on Monday that the case shouldn't proceed because Bauer did nothing to cause the assault.

Guest Judge C.C. Bridgewater asked the prosecution how Bauer could possibly have caused the assault. Deputy Prosecutor Jeremy Morris replied that Bauer allowed the boy to "sleep in a room of loaded guns" and that without that access, the shooting couldn't have happened.

The Kitsap Sun reports the appeals court will decide whether prosecutors can go ahead with the assault charge. A written decision could take months.

The boy pleaded guilty to reckless endangerment and was sentenced to counseling and had to write a letter of apology to Amina.

The boy's mother, Jamie Lee Chaffin, pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm as a felon.

In exchange for her guilty pleas, the court dropped an assault charge against her and she will likely testify against Bauer if his case goes to trial.

http://www.komonews....-180858521.html
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#23 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 29 December 2012 - 01:41 PM

Many police departments have a policy that police officers in the booking area do not carry their firearms while booking prisoners and doing fingerprints to prevent just such an occurrence.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#24 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,633 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 29 December 2012 - 01:51 PM

You honestly think that an assailant wouldn't be able to rush a poorly trained teacher and take their weapon? After all, they know that the teacher will be armed.
Of course why would they even need to do that when they could just shoot them right away and take their ammo for later when they run out of their own?

I guess this comes down to your faith in teacher or another civilian actually being able to shoot and disable a threat (probably better equipped and protected), and not have any other incidents arise as a result of them having a weapon. I have almost zero faith in that happening.


That 12 year old girl in that recent incident in Oklahoma didn't have her gun taken away from her, and given that we're talking about voluntary concealed carry, how would anyone know who's actually armed or not?

The possibility of some people being armed is a strong deterrent even if the number of people actually carrying guns is few.


  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#25 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,589 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 29 December 2012 - 01:55 PM

That 12 year old girl in that recent incident in Oklahoma didn't have her gun taken away from her, and given that we're talking about voluntary concealed carry, how would anyone know who's actually armed or not?

The possibility of some people being armed is a strong deterrent even if the number of people actually carrying guns is few.


And yet there is still far more gun violence in the US where everybody thinks everybody is packing heat than any other industrialized country where less people are perceived to be holding.
  • 0
Posted Image

#26 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,126 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 29 December 2012 - 02:13 PM

Assign an armed guard to each police officer.


Yo Dawg, we heard you like armed guards, so we assigned an armed guard to your armed guard so you can guard while you guard. *insert Xzhibit's face*

B)
  • 1
Posted Image

#27 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 29 December 2012 - 02:14 PM

That 12 year old girl in that recent incident in Oklahoma didn't have her gun taken away from her, and given that we're talking about voluntary concealed carry, how would anyone know who's actually armed or not?

The possibility of some people being armed is a strong deterrent even if the number of people actually carrying guns is few.

As Conservative pundit David Frum writes - "Guns endanger more than they protect".

Frum notes the NRA statement surfaced the key rationale for its views on guns when NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre talked of battle between criminals and civilians, who use guns defensively. Frum writes in fact, guns are used to intimidate and threaten more often than in self-defense and says armed civilians turn ordinary altercations into murderous exchanges of fire.

Editor's note: David Frum, a CNN contributor, is a contributing editor at Newsweek and The Daily Beast. He is the author of eight books, including a new novel "Patriots" and his post-election e-book, "Why Romney Lost." Frum was a special assistant to President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2002.


(CNN) -- The National Rifle Association's Friday press event has received almost uniformly negative reviews. Yet the speech by NRA chief Wayne LaPierre had this merit: It pulled into daylight for all to see the foundational assumption of modern American gun culture.


LaPierre argued that our society is stalked by unknown numbers of monsters, potential mass murders like Adam Lanza. Then he said this: Even if we could somehow identify future Adam Lanzas, "that wouldn't even begin to address the much larger and more lethal criminal class: Killers, robbers, rapists and drug gang members who have spread like cancer in every community in this country."



The "criminal class" sentence is key. In LaPierre's mind, the world is divided between law-abiding citizens and dangerous criminals. Citizens and criminals form two separate and discrete categories. The criminals pose a threat; if the citizens do not go armed against the threat, they will be victimized by the threat.


I know people who carry handguns with them wherever they go, and for just the reason described by LaPierre.


Now let's take a look at the real world of American gun ownership. The following incident occurred in August:


"A man was shot in the face 9 p.m. Friday in an altercation with a neighbor over barking dogs on Atlas Street," Troy Police said.


"Police arrested David George Keats, 73, of Troy [Michigan] and charged him with attempted murder in the incident," according to a media release from the Troy Police Department.


"According to police, witnesses stated that the altercation began when Keats let his three dogs outside and the dogs began to bark. According to the media release, Keats' 52-year-old next door neighbor yelled at the dogs to be quiet and kicked the fence. Keats then ran up to the victim, yelled, 'Don't tell my dogs to shut up,' and began shooting at the victim.


"One bullet hit the man in the face, piercing both cheeks, and four more shots were fired at the victim as he was running away," according to the report.


The encounter between Keats and his neighbor ended nonlethally only by good luck. A shot in the face is a shot to kill.


Nor was this encounter aberrational. There's solid research to show that most so-called defensive gun uses are not really defensive at all.


In the late 1990s, teams of researchers at the Harvard school of public health interviewed dozens of people who had wielded a gun for self-defense. (In many cases, the guns were not fired, but were simply brandished.) The researchers pressed for the fullest description of exactly what happened. They then presented the descriptions to five criminal court judges from three states.


"The judges were told to assume that the respondent had a permit to own and carry the gun and had described the event honestly from his/her own perspective. The judges were then asked to give their best guess whether, based on the respondent's description of the incident, the respondent's use of the gun was very likely legal, likely legal, as likely as not legal, unlikely legal, or very unlikely legal."


Even on those two highly favorable (and not very realistic) assumptions, the judges rated the majority of the self-defensive gun uses as falling into one of the two illegal categories.


The researchers concluded:


"Guns are used to threaten and intimidate far more often than they are used in self-defense. Most self-reported self-defense gun uses may well be illegal and against the interests of society."


That certainly describes the Keats shooting. With a little Google searching, you can pull up dozens of similar incidents.


Here's a story from just this past week, December 22.


"Longview, Washington -- A man shot and killed his uncle during an argument at their apartment complex late Friday night. ...'We heard a big bang,' said Ron Nelson, who lives a few apartments down...Nelson said the men were fighting over a hat and a cell phone."


Now that so many Americans carry weapons when they go out of the home, shooting incidents can occur anywhere, including very commonly the road. Another recent incident: In Pensacola, Florida, in October a man in a Jeep Cherokee cut off another car. A roadway confrontation followed, the two cars stopped, and the Jeep owner emerged to shoot the other driver in the knee. He was arrested this past week.


In these cases, and thousands like them each and every year, it is not so clear who is the "good guy" exercising responsible self-protection and who is the "bad guy" who can only be deterred by an armed citizen.


But the guns in their hands protected exactly nobody. They turned ordinary altercations into murderous exchanges of fire. They brought wounds, death and criminal prosecution where otherwise there would likely only have been angry words or at worst, black eyes.


LaPierre's offers a vision of American society as one unending replay of the worst scenes in Charles Bronson's 1974 vigilante classic, "Death Wish."


The people most victimized by this nightmare vision end up being the people who believe it -- and who carry the weapons that kill or maim their neighbors, their relatives, their spouses, and random passersby.

http://www.cnn.com/2...sion/index.html

As David Frum wrote earlier after the Aurora. Colorado movie theatre shooting, public support for stricter gun control has steadily waned. Despite gun views, fewer Americans today keep a gun in their home as people realize that gun ownership is risky to themselves and their families. Media news reports overplay violence, drive up fear and keeps people focused on gun rights. Just what the NRA wants.


There will be no new gun laws after the Aurora shooting for the basic reason that the American people do not want them.


Over the past 20 years, support for gun control has collapsed in the United States.


Three-quarters of Americans want to keep the right to own handguns, weapons whose only function is to kill human beings at close range. In 1959, 60% of Americans wanted handguns banned outright for all but police officers.


Responding to public opinion, states have loosened gun laws to allow citizens to carry weapons with them almost anywhere they go. In Georgia, Arizona, Tennessee and Virginia, it's legal to carry a gun into a bar. Guns and booze: What could go wrong?


But here's the odd thing: At the same time as Americans have become more enthusiastic about gun rights, fewer and fewer Americans actually want to own a gun themselves.


In the 1990s, the proportion of Americans who kept a gun in the home tumbled from one-half to one-third. And while gun ownership has risen in the Obama years, it remains lower than in the 1960s when strong majorities of the American people demanded stricter laws.


How can we make sense of this weird divergence between beliefs and behavior?


Americans support gun rights because they believe guns are necessary for self-protection. As the Georgia lawmaker who introduced the law allowing guns to be carried in bars explained:


"Folks were being robbed, assaulted -- it was becoming an issue of personal safety. The police aren't going to be able to protect you. They're going to be checking out the crime scene after you and your family's been shot or injured or assaulted or raped."


At the same time, people hesitate to own guns themselves because they recognize that keeping a gun in the house is a dangerous thing to do. A gun in the house minimally doubles the risk that a household member will kill himself or herself. (Some studies put the increase in suicide risk as high as 10 times.) An American is 50% more likely to be shot dead by his or her own hand than to be shot dead by a criminal assailant. More than 30,000 Americans injure themselves with guns every year.


The good news is that as America becomes safer, fewer and fewer Americans feel the need for a weapon. The overall violent crime index has tumbled by one-third since the early 1990s. The worst crimes -- murder and rape -- have declined even more. American citizens are safer today from crime than at almost any time since record-keeping began, very likely safer than at any time in the history of the country.


Americans perceive these improvements in the safety of their immediate neighborhood. Back in the early 1980s, half of Americans said they feared to walk alone at night near their own homes. By the early 2000s, only one-third expressed such fears. (Those fears have ticked up a little in the last few years, even as crime rates continue to fall, but again they remain way below historic peaks.)


Yet unfortunately, Americans are not, however, nearly so accurate at assessing national trends. In the mid-2000s, when crime rates were declining fast, almost 70% of Americans wrongly said that crime rates had risen over the past year.


What force on earth could convince Americans that down is up? The most powerful force of all: television.

TV news -- and especially local TV news -- is dominated by news of violent crime, the more spectacular and murderous the better. TV news creates a false picture of a country under attack by rampaging criminals, and especially nonwhite criminals. The people who watch the most TV news, Americans older than 50, also happen to be the group most likely to own a gun.


Only one-fifth of young Americans own a gun; one-third of over-50 Americans do. Republicans are twice as likely to own a gun as Democrats. Maybe not so coincidentally, Republicans are more likely to watch the scariest news channel of them all: Fox. Whites are twice as likely to own a gun as nonwhites -- and it may also not be a coincidence that gun purchases have suddenly spiked since November 2008.


Proponents of gun control are baffled that horrific massacres such as the one in Aurora, Colorado, do not lead to stricter gun control. They have their causation backward.


The more terrifyingly criminal the world looks, the more ineffective law enforcement seems, the more Americans demand the right to deadly weapons with which to defend themselves. It is local TV programming directors, not the National Rifle Association, who are tirelessly persuading Americans that they need to strap a gun to their legs before heading to the mall.


And what will change those attitudes is not more atrocity stories, but instead the reassuring truth: The United States is safe and getting safer, safer than ever before in its history.


The police can protect you, and will, and do. And a gun in the house is not a guarantee of personal security -- it is instead a standing invitation to family tragedy. The cold dead hands from which they pry the gun are very unlikely to be the hands of a heroic minuteman defending home and hearth against intruders. They are much more likely to be the hands of a troubled adolescent or a clumsy child.


In the land of the Second Amendment, nobody will take your guns away. But if you love your children, you should get rid of them voluntarily.

http://www.cnn.com/2...guns/index.html
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#28 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,633 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 29 December 2012 - 02:23 PM

And yet there is still far more gun violence in the US where everybody thinks everybody is packing heat than any other industrialized country where less people are perceived to be holding.


Most of the gun violence in the U.S. is due to gangs and thugs, if they could actually deal with that effectively you'd not only drastically reduce the gun violence but also the number of people who believe its necessary to carry a gun on a daily basis.
  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#29 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 29 December 2012 - 02:25 PM

0/10


You gave an awful post the dignity of a good response. :(


I just wonder, if you can lower yourself to a response, at what point is it safer to eliminate the majority of these guns because obviously people cannot be trusted with them? Yes, yes, yes, there are plenty of people who practice safe shooting, safe this and that, but with the multiple stories per day of 'accidental' shootings, at what point do you say enough is enough, we need to do all we can to prevent these people from having weapons because we're frankly too stupid to manage them ourselves?

Or is it just toe the line, everyone should have access to guns because it is a 'right'?

Mock my point re: teachers all you want, I find it comical that you think having an armed teacher in a classroom with 30 odd kids running around is safer than not having a loaded gun.
  • 1

#30 hsedin33

hsedin33

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,650 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 10

Posted 29 December 2012 - 02:42 PM

A gun's only use is to kill, therefore it can only ever do more harm then good.

Edited by hsedin33, 29 December 2012 - 02:44 PM.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.