How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 The Circus in Tucson   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

The Circus in Tucson

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


25 posted 01-14-2011 06:17 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

One of the things I've always admired about you Ron is your ability to discuss in the abstract.  So, as long as we're in the abstract let's go there:

1. Rupert Murdoch and George Soros both own nuclear arsenals.  Which one of them gets to decide if the government has become tyrannical?

2. If one of them drops a nuke on Washington, thereby murdering millions of people -- did the government fail in its' obligation to provide for the common defense?

Or lets bring it back down to Earth and talk about the issue at hand.  Tuscon Tea Party leader Trent Humphries says that it's Gifford's own fault getting shot for appearing in a public venue.

3. If we can't have free and open interaction with our elected representatives, and they with us, without having to go through stringent security measures (which would be of dubious efficacy) doesn't that place limits on our constitutional right to representation?

And,

4. Wasn't Loughner merely exercising his implied right to use his second amendment solution against a government he interpreted -- in his own disturbed mind -- as being unconstitutional?  

or;

5. Didn't the Whiskey Rebellion establish that you don't get to just take up arms against the government if you disagree with a policy here or a tax there?  Thereby nullifying any notion that the second amendment exists to empower the people against the government?
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


26 posted 01-14-2011 06:47 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


People have the right to free speech - but there are restrictions on the types of speech.
People have the right practice their religion - but there are restrictions on the types of practices.
People have the right to bear arms - but there are restrictions on the type of arms you can bear.

For mentally disturbed individuals, to protect themselves and others, that restriction is firearms.

You can argue in favour of a universal right to bear arms Ron but the reality is it doesn't exist, it never really did. Perhaps more importantly it never could exist, we'd have to remove the restrictions on kids, criminals and the mentally disturbed for that to become a reality and, I'm guessing here, but I don't think that's what you're suggesting.

Would a law that made it less likely for a kid, a criminal or a mentally disturbed person to get their hands on a firearm be such a bad thing? How could such a law remove or diminish a right that they never had in the first place?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


27 posted 01-14-2011 07:04 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Is the question that we need more rules or that we need to enforce the ones we have?
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


28 posted 01-14-2011 07:36 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Why not bring back the assault weapons ban Mike?  Which included a restriction on magazine size -- the most shots Loughner would have been able to get off before being tackled (by people without any arms) would have been 10 instead of 30.  A nine-year-old might still be alive if it hadn't been allowed to lapse.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


29 posted 01-14-2011 08:00 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I'm sorry, LR. Was there an answer to my question in that response?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


30 posted 01-14-2011 08:04 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

As far as the magazine size goes, anyone even vaguely familiar with firearms could pop out and insert a clip in 2 seconds and keep firing.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


31 posted 01-14-2011 09:04 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

The Raw Story's Headline mischaracterized Humphries statements, L.R. No surprise, I suppose.

His point was that he didn't think that Giffords truly thought that Palin's 'crosshairs' map (practiced by both sides, by the way...Bob Beckel said that he created the first 'target map' eons ago) was actually fomenting an atmosphere of danger, but rather viewed her stated concern over it as political gamesmanship, otherwise she would not have appeared at a public event without a security detail if she were truly concerned. Far different than their headline, don't you think?

The media and the left in general are missing the point, though. There is no reason to blame anyone other than the shooter. He wasn't a right-wing lunatic. His morbid fascination with Giffords dates back to 2007, prior to Palin's entry onto the national stage and prior to the formation of any of the Tea Party groups. That should end all their finger pointing at them.

I also don't see the Tea Party Express's request for donations to help fight the slanders as profiting off of the tragedy. It is merely an attempt to raise the funds to fight back effectively against the smears being hurled by the left. The left creates the situation and then continues to smear even any attempt to defend against the situation that they created.

For a true display of profiteering off of the tragedy, no one needs to look any further than the Obama 2012 kick-off campaign...otherwise known as the Arizona Memorial Service.
http://redwhitebluenews.com/?p=14413

Truly profane. They have no shame and not a shred of common decency.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


32 posted 01-14-2011 10:15 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Wasn't Loughner merely exercising his implied right to use his second amendment solution against a government he interpreted -- in his own disturbed mind -- as being unconstitutional?

I'm sure he thought so, Reb. Just as Jefferson and Washington thought so in 1776. And Robert E. Lee in 1861. History, of course, is still written by the winners.

How do you stop the Loughners and the Lees, though, without also stopping the Jefferesons and the Washingtons?

quote:
You can argue in favour of a universal right to bear arms Ron but the reality is it doesn't exist, it never really did.

It existed in 1776, Uncas. For a little while.

quote:
Would a law that made it less likely for a kid, a criminal or a mentally disturbed person to get their hands on a firearm be such a bad thing?

Would a law that made it less likely for a misinformed idiot to badmouth our heroes, be they politicians or warriors or priests, be such a bad thing? How about a law to prevent the uneducated masses from worshiping false gods? We can always find a thousand justifications for limiting someone else's freedom, Craig. And every time we allow it we put our own freedoms at risk.

Of the three groups you cite, Uncas, only one is not at the whim of authority. A criminal is anyone your government says is a criminal. A mentally disturbed person is, well, pretty much all of us. Personally, I think the misinformed idiots and uneducated masses are far greater threats. Don't you?  

There are already laws against killing other people. At least in most states, I think? Texas might be an exception? If someone is willing to break those laws I just don't see how adding more laws is going to deter them.

quote:
Truly profane. They have no shame and not a shred of common decency.

I'm sorry, Denise, but that kind of hyperbole is out of place in any rational discussion. It does nothing but jeopardize your own credibility. There are plenty of legitimate complaints that can be lodged against our politicians, on both sides of the aisle, without resorting to demonizing them. They are people, Denise, most of them damn good people with the best of intentions. Yea, those good intentions are paving the way to Hell, but the road workers are all human beings, not evil devils.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


33 posted 01-14-2011 10:35 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I find little decency in passing out "Together We Thrive" t-shirts at a supposed memorial service. The victims of the shooting didn't thrive too well...and they were supposed to be the subjects of the memorial, I thought.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


34 posted 01-14-2011 11:12 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I wasn't speaking of our public servents who have the best of intentions, Ron, only the people who chose to use a memorial service as a political rally. But yes, I agree, they are not evil devils. They are human beings, but human beings whose actions depicted a thoughtless lack of decorum at what was supposed to be a memorial service for the dead, not a venue for handing out t-shirts with a retread slogan from the 2008 campaign. Were there no adults in charge of the event to signal to the attendees not to whoop, holler and cat-call, even as the names of the dead were being read? It was a shameful display.
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


35 posted 01-15-2011 09:35 AM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas

Even in 1776 the right to bear arms wasn't universal Ron, it was restricted by state laws which were almost carbon copies of English law. In fact the right to bear arms itself was effectively the same right granted under the English Bill of rights of 1689 which was adopted by Congress as an interim solution until the Constitution was adopted in 1787.

Up until the second amendment in 1791 an American's right to bear arms was the same as an Englishman's, here described by Sir William Blackstone in his Commentaries of the Laws of England (1776):

"The fifth and last auxiliary right of the subject, that I shall at present mention, is that of having arms for their defense, suitable to their condition and degree, and such as are allowed by law. Which is also declared by the same statute I W. & M. st.2. c.2. and is indeed a public allowance, under due restrictions, of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation, when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression."


Balladeer,

quote:
Is the question that we need more rules or that we need to enforce the ones we have?


I can't speak for others but I'm advocating enforcing the laws that are already in place, unfortunately that may mean changing the law itself to stipulate the process by which enforcement is achieved.

.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


36 posted 01-15-2011 11:40 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

I'm sorry, LR. Was there an answer to my question in that response?



Only if your question was rhetorical.  Or literal.

quote:

The Raw Story's Headline mischaracterized Humphries statements



Why should that matter Denise?

quote:

As far as the magazine size goes, anyone even vaguely familiar with firearms could pop out and insert a clip in 2 seconds and keep firing.



And yet, it was adequate time for a madman with a gun to be subdued -- by a little old lady.

But, ok, by your logic -- since it takes so little time to change clips -- a 10 round clip should be just fine!  Right?

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


37 posted 01-15-2011 12:46 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

Good grief, if I had a dollar for every time an American said "carrying a gun is my Constitutional Right" I'd be a multi billionaire.  What's wrong with you?  Can't you grow up, and if you have to play at being cowboys and red indians use a pea shooter?  

Hellooooo!  The 2nd Amendment was adopted in 1791:

-  before the Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol and the ability to cut down 10's of innocents in seconds
-  before millions of you lived in crowded cities
-  before therapists were Gods
-  when the right wing religious nut cases had their work cut out just to stay alive
-  when macho hunters actually hunted to survive instead of being fat couch potatoes rolling out in their 4 x 4's each weekend to murder squirrels
-  when you actually had to kick out the vile Brits, the impertinent Red Skins, and a few of your own hell raising compatriots
-  when James Madison had some valid reasons for encouraging citizens to have guns, reasons which vanished years ago
- when "Rights" were respected, cherished and deserved, instead of being baubles pulled out with a petulant flourish by spoiled children every time their toys are taken away

Harsh?  Humm, maybe.  But for all the talk of restrictions and bans, there's ultimately only one solution to this, and that's for adults to behave as adults and to admit that guns are made for one purpose and one alone - to maim and kill.  Then go teach your kids that to maim and kill is a bad thing, and to hate and fear guns.

Above all teach them the truth, that possession of a gun is a shameful and degrading thing.

Then maybe in a few generations there might be a degree of sanity again.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


38 posted 01-15-2011 01:00 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

How do you stop the Loughners and the Lees, though, without also stopping the Jefferesons and the Washingtons?



By paying attention?

I would first ask for a review of the topic of Maj. Nidal Hassan, and then ask --

Is it a Duck?

quote:

Several GOP officials from the same area in Arizona have resigned following last week's shooting rampage in Tucson, including a district chairman who said threats from local tea party members caused him to be worried for the safety of himself and his family.

Anthony Miller, 43, stepped down earlier this week as chair of Republican District 20 after his wife expressed concerns about "constant verbal attacks" against him since helping Sen. John McCain win reelection in November, The Arizona Republic reported.

McCain was opposed by some parts of the conservative tea party movement in Arizona. Since the election victory, Miller said he has been the subject of intimidating and threatening rhetoric in person and on Internet message boards.

Still, Miller said, he had no plans to leave his post until the attempted assassination of Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords during a massacre that left six dead and 14 wounded.

"I wasn't going to resign but decided to quit after what happened Saturday," Miller told The Huffington Post Wednesday. "I love the Republican Party but I don't want to take a bullet for anyone."

Miller, who is black, said a number of the attacks were racially based. At an event in Lake Havasu City, Ariz., Miller told The Huffington Post that someone called out, "There's Anthony, get a rope."
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/01/12/arizona-gop-official-resigns-citi   ng-tea-party-threats-i-dont/



quote:

Wasserman Schultz is referring to Joyce Kaufman, an outspoken South Florida conservative radio talk show host on WFTL-850 AM, who garnered national attention after newly elected U.S. Rep. Allen West hired her as his chief of staff a week after the Nov. 2, 2010, election. She resigned from that position days later amid controversy, and after someone sent a threat to her that stated: "I'm planning something big around the government building here in Broward County, maybe a post office, maybe even a school. ..." The threat led to a lockdown of Broward schools Nov. 10 and an FBI investigation.

At a political rally on July 3, 2010, Kaufman addressed a Broward County crowd about the need to change the culture in Washington by electing new members to the House and Senate. Her entire speech has been posted on YouTube and is about 10 minutes long. You can watch her speech here.

A few of our notes after watching the entire speech: Kaufman suggested that, without a changing of the guard in Washington, people could be banned from street corners and that "there would be kill switches on the Internet." She told the crowd to put the brakes on this "insanity" that's been happening, and to get rid of "these people in Washington who have no integrity." Kaufman said the 2010 election was the most important one in "our lifetime," and that she says "what I mean, and I mean what I say."

She then talked about the Founding Fathers and how brilliant they were.

"They gave us ballots," she said a little more than 5 minutes into her speech. "That is the first line of defense ... We send home all of these incumbents who have done nothing to represent the people. They don't come to their districts. They don't talk to us.

"And then the Founding Fathers were ever so brilliant -- and I don't care how this gets painted by the mainstream media, I don't care if this shows up on YouTube -- because I am convinced that the most important thing the Founding Fathers did to ensure me my First Amendment rights is they gave me a Second Amendment," Kaufman said, referring to the constitutional amendment that speaks of gun rights.

"And if ballots don't work, bullets will," Kaufman said, as people in the crowd reacted by clapping. One person is heard saying "Absolutely," and another says "Amen."

"I never in my life thought that the day would come where I would tell individual citizens that you are responsible for being the militia that the Founding Fathers designed," she said. "They were very specific. You need to be prepared to fight tyranny, whether it comes from outside, or whether it comes from inside."
http://www.politifact.com/florida/stateme   nts/2011/jan/10/debbie-wasserman-schultz/arizona-shooting-prompts-questions-about-civility-/



quote:

November 5, 2010 (San Diego) – In the sore loser category, Republican Nick Popaditch wins hands down.



Multiple credible news sites have reported that after Democratic Congressman Bob Filner was declared winner  by a 20-point margin, a mob of Popaditch supporters, including Tea Party and white supremacist members, cornered and spat on Popaditch’s opponent, Filner. Video by the Chula Vista Star News reveals that Popaditch cursed at Filner, called him a liar, and made no efforts to calm down an increasingly virulent mob that forced Filner out of Golden Hall’s Election Central and into the lobby. Filner told CityBeat that he was shoved by Popaditch.



“Last night, Nick Popadith made Election Central a threatening and unsafe place to be,” CityBeat’s Dave Masse wrote. Mayor Jerry Sanders’ security detail ultimately rescued the Congressman from the mob, CityBeat reported.


East County Magazine reporter Mary Paulet interviewed a witness, Robin Buse, during the altercation, whose statement confirms Filner's allegation. Buse told ECM that she saw Popaditch push Filner. “I ran and got the cops,” added Buse, a Filner supporter. Others, fearful for their safety, confirmed assaults by Popaditch and his supporters.



A second witness, who asked not to be named, said she also saw pushing and cussing.  She added that a Popaditch supporter also pushed a Filner supporter. East County Magazine editor Miriam Raftery, also at the scene, spoke with yet another distraught person who said “Popaditch just went after Filner.” Raftery photographed police officers moving in to calm down the mob.
.....
The San Diego Union-Tribune quotes Filner as saying “It was like a mob scene…there was violence in their eyes."

Popaditch supporters chanted loudly, drowning out everyone else in the room, pressing inward while shaking fists and shouting in angry tones. Citybeat reports that Popaditch supporters were angered because they believed Filner misrepresented Popaditch’s voting record in ads, however the ads

were technically correct. The ads stated that Popaditch did not vote for many years, which is true; however the ad omits to mention that Popaditch did vote more recently.


Popaditch, a combat veteran and former Marine drill sergeant whose unit helped topple the statue of Saddam Hussein, was medically retired after losing vision in a grenade explosion. The eyepatch-sporting veteran, “seemed more like a military commander than a candidate when he tried to take Election Central by brute force and intimidation,” Masse wrote.

Now an avowed white Supremacist follower of Popaditch , who uses the nickname “Aurick the Great White Elf” on a White Supremacist website, Stormfront.org, has posted video on YouTube filmed during the incident. The video incites followers to violence, CityBeat reported. Calling the election a “complete fraud” the narrative ads, “Total war is all that’s left to us! I saw the beginning of it last night and so did you…they tyrants are still in power!...We have rebel friends around the world too that will join us in our eternal struggle.” Aurick admits on Stormfront to being a Ku Klux Klan member. And rails against Jews, noting “Jews secretly control the world.” Filner is Jewish.


Aurick’s video of the mob scene at Golden Hall, intersperses images of AK-47 guns, militias, the Irish Republican Army and more, and a “Sniper at work” sign. Aurick also changed his profile image from a Beavis & Butthead sketch to a photo of a man wearing a ski-mask, armed with a shoulder-mounted assault weapon.

Popaditch , who uses the nickname “Gunny Pop” on Facebook, thus far has said nothing to disavow the violent and threatening actions of his followers—and instead has acted like the leader of the pack. His website claims he is ready to “charge the Hill for our country and protect what our Founding Fathers fought for.”
http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/4690
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOeRGjkC42g&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2yQNZYHiO4&feature=player_embedded
http://lastblogonearth.com/2010/11/05/white-   power-popaditch-supporter-brags-about-golden-hall-violence-calls-for-armed-revolution/



quote:

Arizona shooting: Seven times politics turned to threats or violence last year
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/P   olitics/2011/0110/Arizona-shooting-Seven-times-politics-turned-to-threats-or-violence-last-year/Rep.-Tom-Perriello

At first glance Loughner’s philosophy appears to be not so much a coherent view of looking at the world as the random thoughts of a disturbed person. His online postings and videos are full of non sequiturs and rants about the debasement of US currency and government control of language and grammar.

On Loughner:

“His writings will be virtually impossible for most people to understand, what with his references to unexplained numbers, his fondness for weird syllogisms, his unexplained references and his apparent semi-literacy,” writes Mark Potok, a hate group analyst at the Southern Poverty Law Center, on his blog.

But Mr. Potok notes that government debasement of the currency is a tenet of antigovernment “Patriot” movement extremist groups, and that Patriot conspiracy theorist David Wynn Miller has long held that the government uses grammar to enslave Americans, and that if an individual adds colons and hyphens to their name in a certain way, they are no longer required to pay taxes.

Miller’s ideas may seem loony “but he has a real following on the right,” writes Potok.

On Nov. 30 last year, Loughner bought a Glock semi-automatic pistol at Sportsman’s Warehouse in Tucson. The purchase was entirely legal, according to Pima County Sheriff Dupnik. The gun retailer would have had no knowledge of any of Loughner’s past troubles unless he had been “declared mentally incompetent officially by the courts,” said Dupnik in an MSNBC appearance Monday.

Loughner reportedly tried to buy ammunition at a WalMart but failed because a clerk was put off by his odd behavior. He subsequently was able to purchase the ammunition at another WalMart, according to CNN.

The Glock was the weapon used to open fire on Giffords and the crowd waiting to meet with her on Saturday, according to the FBI. The six killed included US District Court Judge John Roll and a nine-year old girl, Christina Taylor Green, who was born Sept. 11, 2001.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0110/Jared-Lee-Lou   ghner-what-is-known-about-Tucson-Arizona-shooting-suspect/%28page%29/2



quote:

Sharron Angle floated possibility of armed insurrection

Here's another one that could be tough for Sharron Angle to explain away: In an interview in January, Angle appeared to float the possibility of armed insurrection if "this Congress keeps going the way it is."

I'm not kidding. In an interview she gave to a right-wing talk show host, Angle approvingly quoted Thomas Jefferson saying it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years -- and said that if Congress keeps it up, people may find themselves resorting to "Second Amendment remedies."

What's more, the talk show host she spoke to tells me he doesn't have any doubt that she was floating the possibility of armed insurrection as a valid response if Congress continues along its current course.

Asked by the host, Lars Larson of Portland, Oregon, where she stands on Second Amendment issues, Angle replied:

    You know, our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. And in fact Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years.

    I hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out.

Larson says Angle was floating the possibility of armed insurrection if Congress keeps it up under Reid et al.

"If it continues to do the things it's doing, I think she's leaving open that possibility," Larson said. "And I think the founders believed that the public should be able to do that when the government becomes out of control. It just matters what you define as going too far."
sharron angle floated armed insurrection

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


39 posted 01-15-2011 01:14 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

I find little decency in passing out "Together We Thrive" t-shirts at a supposed memorial service. The victims of the shooting didn't thrive too well...and they were supposed to be the subjects of the memorial, I thought.



quote:

The University of Arizona memorial service for the victims of the Tucson, Ariz. shootings was called "Together We Thrive." But Michelle Malkin claimed the slogan was cooked up by the White House

In an opinion piece about the Jan. 12, 2011, memorial event, Malkin, a conservative pundit, accused the White House of "branding" the memorial service with the slogan, complete with its own logo.

Malkin noted that all 13,000 people who attended the "Together We Thrive" event were given blue and white T-shirts with the logo.

"Can't the Democrat political stage managers give it a break just once?" Malkin wrote in her column.

But officials at the University of Arizona say it was all their idea. Malkin later ran an update to her column, noting the university's claims, but she maintained that the odds of White House involvement were high. Without evidence to back up the claim the White House used the shooting tragedy as an opportunity to orchestrate a "branded" political event, we rated Malkin's claim False
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/jan/14/did-white-house-brand-arizona-memorial-service-log/

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


40 posted 01-15-2011 02:06 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
I wasn't speaking of our public servents who have the best of intentions, Ron, only the people who chose to use a memorial service as a political rally.

Okay, you didn't like it. Why not say that instead of blowing it up into something much, much worse? Why not berate what was done instead of ending your post with a gross exaggeration of the people who did it?

When push comes to shove, it's just one more example of people believing the end justifies the means. One of COUNTLESS recent examples, at least half of which have been perpetrated by those on your side of the aisle, Denise.

quote:
Even in 1776 the right to bear arms wasn't universal Ron, it was restricted by state laws which were almost carbon copies of English law.

In 1776, Uncas, there weren't any state laws because there weren't yet any states. Three hundred years later, the state laws STILL don't supercede the Constitution.

Doesn't matter, though, because even though we're not exactly the Supreme Court, my point was meant to reference the intent of the Founders. I'm sure, like you, they never meant for firearms to be supplied to children, criminals, or the insane, but unlike you, they didn't write that into the Constitution. Why? Perhaps because they realized that limitations on freedoms will ALWAYS be abused by a government sooner or later.

quote:
Hellooooo!  The 2nd Amendment was adopted in 1791:

And the bottom line, Moonbeam, is that it's still in the U.S. Constitution in 2011. You don't like it? Lobby for an amendment to have it changed. It's happened before (the 18th amendment) and I sincerely hope to see it happen again.

So long as the right to bear arms stands on a par with free speech and the other Constitution rights, however, it needs to be protected from people who believe not liking something gives them the right to act as if that something doesn't exist.

quote:
By paying attention?

I would first ask for a review of the topic of Maj. Nidal Hassan, and then ask --

Is it a Duck?

Again, Reb . . . you're arguing that freedom is less important than security.

Every time a loony pops out of the woodwork people start yelling that it should be easier to lock up the loonies so bad stuff can't happen. The same exact thing happens when a patently guilty man walks out of a court room free because of some legal technicality. Things like that just shouldn't happen.

But they have to happen in a free society where everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The minute we make it easy to lock up the loony or the guilty, we also make it easy to lock up our brothers, our sisters, our children. I think on some subconscious level, we visualize ourselves personally closing the cell door on the bad guy and locking it so they never hurt anyone ever again. The trouble with that visage is that we don't hold the keys. Someone else does. And frankly, guys, we can't trust that someone else to always get it right. Worse, we would be utter fools to believe they would at least always try.

So we erect legal barriers. The barriers aren't there to protect the loony or the guilty. They're there to protect the innocent. They're there to protect you and me.

quote:
In an opinion piece about the Jan. 12, 2011, memorial event, Malkin, a conservative pundit, accused the White House of "branding" the memorial service with the slogan, complete with its own logo.

Malkin noted that all 13,000 people who attended the "Together We Thrive" event were given blue and white T-shirts with the logo.

"Can't the Democrat political stage managers give it a break just once?" Malkin wrote in her column.

Thanks, Reb, for the research.

Ultimately, though, I don't think it should matter whether it was true or not. Cooked up by the White House? Sorry, but the White House doesn't represent the Democratic party. It represents America.

People aren't under any obligation to LIKE the way their country responds to tragedy, any more than they're obligated to like their country at all, but it makes little sense to pretend it's NOT their country. President Obama didn't speak at the memorial as the leader of a political party. He spoke as the President of the United States. OUR United States.


Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


41 posted 01-15-2011 02:21 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Ron,

quote:
Essorant, you're simply arguing, as did Uncas, that freedom is less important than security


I don't think I am Ron.  To me Security doesn't act against freedom in general; it only acts against certain extents of freedom, but it does so to give us freedom: freedom from danger and harm.  When we argue that there ought to be more security regarding guns, we are not arguing for less freedom in general, but for more freedom: freedom from the danger and harm of them.   I agree, there is one extent of freedom against another: but I don't see how one compares to the other.  In which way should I hold your freedom to have a gun with less restrictions, as highly as freedom from more chances that people like loughner might get the guns, with more restrictions?   It is not really an argument of giving up freedom, but of transfering some of your freedom from one freedom to another.  I don't see how/why anyone wouldn't be able to make that transfer, if it means more freedom from potential harm and danger.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


42 posted 01-15-2011 02:28 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Essorant, forget about guns for a second. Words can hurt just as much as bullets and, indeed, are almost always at the ROOT of violence. So, let's see you apply your logic to our freedom of speech?

Do you really think I should have access to your medical records before letting you post?  

Remember, Ess, under current law, the right to bear arms and the right to free speech fall under exactly the same umbrella. You can do nothing to affect one without similarly affecting the other.


Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


43 posted 01-15-2011 02:30 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

Again, Reb . . . you're arguing that freedom is less important than security.



Am not

I'm arguing that there are three constitutional provisions that have to be treated equally here;  common defense, representation, keep and bear arms.

The second amendment makes no guarantee that you have the right to own ANY arm that is ever made.  And certainly not a 9mm Glock with a 33 round magazine.

Want an arm? -- have a musket.

Ok -- a shotgun -- but not sawed off.

And there is absolutely no reason that anyone should have a handgun.  Including police.
Ringo
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 02-20-2003
Posts 3696
Saluting with misty eyes


44 posted 01-15-2011 02:31 PM       View Profile for Ringo   Email Ringo   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ringo

This might be a little late in teh discussion; however the actual "right" that Americans are given is spelled out thusly:
quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

There have been people interpreting this in different ways since 1791, and the argument has been tested in the Supreme Court.

One school of thought is that this precludes ANYONE from denying any citizen from owning any weapon they should so choose to own. Being owned responsibly, this is the interpretation that I subscribe to.

Another thought is that there is no reason for a well regulated militia any longer, so we have no right to bear arms. I do not subscribe to that line of thinking any more than I believe that my cold dead fingers are going to be involved in them taking my weapons away... well, that is another dicsussion for another time.

I have owned weapons for the last *mumble* years since I got my first one at the age of seven. My father, a Marine Corps marksman and safety instructor taught me how to use it safely, how to hold it, and when to bring it out of the storage space we had for it (I believe the phrase was, "When I get it out for you."). The worst my backside ever hurt was when I pulled it out to show my friends one bright, cheery Saturday afternoon, and was caught by my father. Even though there was no ammunition anywhere in the house, and the firing pin was (I found out later) hidden in a pair of my father's dress shoes in his closet, he let me know in no uncertain terms that I screwed up worse than I had ever thought possible. To this day, I remember that spanking, and have NEVER mishandled, misused, or was unsafe with any weapon that I have owned since then. I also keep the trigger locks on, and the ammunition under lock and the firing pins held safely somewhere else.

Moombeam- "If you have to play at being cowboys and red Indians?"
Sounds a might condescending, what? To say that we are doing so implies that we are running around pointing them at each lother and going "bang". I can assure you that it is the furthest thing from the truth. I, as stated, own several weapons- including a Glock 17, a Desert Eagle .357 auto mag, a SPAS 12, a .300 Savage, and a variety of hunting rifles- and they are as safe as I can possibly make them. My children have been taught from a very early beginning that I will cut off their ears and pin them to the nearest tree (figuratively speaking, of course) should they be anywhere near them at any time I am not standing beside them. The cases, in addition to the measures I spoke of earlier, are all locked, and the keys are held in a separate location. In order for someone to actually use them, there is going to have to be a considerable effort put forth in order to do so. There are 5 locks that must be undone to be able to effectively fire any of the weapons I own, as well as taking them apart and putting the firing mechanisms back into place, loading the magazines, and then actually using them. I am not going to go through all of that to hold it in my hand and run through the park yelling, "I got you!"

Fat couch potatoes? Well... I probably should lose a few pounds; however, fat, I ain't. As for rolling out in my 4x4 to murder squirrels...
Dictionary.com refers to the term "murder as such:
the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law
Squirrels do not, the last I knew, qualified to be murdered, although, a good fox squirrel makes a tasty stew. There, generally, is no good use for murder, whereas when I go out bambie blasting (as my favorite tree hugger calls it) and come home having successfully completed the mission of depriving another living creature of it's right to breathe, my family and I actually use the parts. The meat is separated and frozen for future meals, the bones (some of them) are used to make a rather tasty stock for venison soup/stew, and the hide is sold to a local leather worker who uses it for his business. Are all hunters a consciencious as I? Of course not; however, by lumping all hunters/gun owners together, you do us and yourself as much of a disservice as if I had made the statement that all liberals/anti-gun advocates are tree-hugging, dirt-worshippers. Clearly this is not the case in either side of the argument.

You also make the point about rights being cherished, respected, and such... this also includes the current administration and the liberal Democratic congressional leadership who are calling for the banning of certain speech, including some- not all- of them who are calling for the banning of talk radio. It is not only the right side of the isle who is abusing the rights of others, and if this point is to be made, it should be made to include EVERYONE from all political thoughts who do such.


Well... that's enough preaching from me.

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting, "WHAT A RIDE

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


45 posted 01-15-2011 02:40 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

the current administration and the liberal Democratic congressional leadership who are calling for the banning of certain speech, including some- not all- of them who are calling for the banning of talk radio.



Really?  Who, what, where, when, how?
moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


46 posted 01-15-2011 03:04 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

"Words can hurt just as much as bullets"

Really Ron, I think you can do better than that pathetic old cliche.  I somehow think Giffords would have preferred words through her head anyday.

Yeah, sure words hurt sometimes, but isn't that what civilised debate is all about?  Spraying words about rather than bullets seems preferable to me.
moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


47 posted 01-15-2011 03:11 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

"I, as stated, own several weapons- including a Glock 17, a Desert Eagle .357 auto mag, a SPAS 12, a .300 Savage, and a variety of hunting rifles- and they are as safe as I can possibly make them ..."

I love the juxtaposition of "safe" in that sentence. Gawd help us all.

So Ringo, you are happy to take the risk (and moral risk)of owning that armoury, just so as you can go out once in a while and enjoy yourself killing a few animals.  

A caveman I talked to a few millenia ago told me he kept his selection of prize clubs safe at the back of his cave, and only took them out to bag a few females now and then.

Yay for "civilisation".  Humm.

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


48 posted 01-15-2011 03:22 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

"And the bottom line, Moonbeam, is that it's still in the U.S. Constitution in 2011"

Yes of course it is Ron, that was my entire point.

It's still there because the majority of people want it to be presumably.

I'm bemoaning (and worried about) the fact that a majority of adults can't see the ridiculousness of it being there, and don't seem to want to do anything about it.

AND ..

"And the bottom line, Moonbeam, is that it's still in the U.S. Constitution in 2011"

You know what really hacks me off .. it's the way intelligent people seem to love to take advantage of rules that they know are patently absurd.  

So, it's IN the Constitution still, that doesn't mean that you HAVE to use it as an excuse to behave badly when you know darned well it's outdated and irrelevant to the needs of the day.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


49 posted 01-15-2011 03:26 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Can't you grow up, and if you have to play at being cowboys and red indians use a pea shooter?  

One must assume, moonbeam, that your main purpose of such a comment is to insult and irritate. I would have thought people would have learned something from the temporary closing of this forum.

LR, yes he was subdued but one can easily make the point that, if he had come with multiple clips, prepared to use them, he would not have put himself in such a position where he could be subdued so easily. We have had instances in the not too distant past where multiple clips WERE used.

I, personally, do not agree with the possession of assault weapons, nor the large banana clips. I doubt that that is the point, however, in this particular instance. If  he had gone in with a six-shooter and shot six people, the result would have been death to the innocents.

What we have is a nutcase who had been harboring hatred for the congresswomen for over three years. He went after her. If he  had not been able to get a gun legally, he may have gotten one illegally. If he couldn't have gotten a gun, he could have fashioned a molotov cocktail and thrown it or used a bow and arrow or anything to get the job done.

To try to turn in into something political, or spurred on by hate speech, or the position of the moon is silly. We have an unbalanced individual who carried out a criminal act.

Ron, as president of the United States and not the Democratic party? This is the man who said (before the last elections), "the Republicans can come along for the ride but they have to sit in back." You sure about that?
Daddy Goose38 will be notified of replies
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> The Circus in Tucson   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors