Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6866
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 04 Dec 2015, 10:27 am

Shall the ones who incite violence be censured as well in this case, as was suggested in another forum?

Wasn't this a "gun free zone"?

Doesn't California have tough gun laws?

Aren't explosives illegal in California?

HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN WITH ALL THESE LAWS IN PLACE?



My goodness, there are those who are worried about prayer and moments of silence? Perhaps Climate change is a bigger concern? Please show me how Climate change has killed anybody. The weather goes up, and it goes down. Live with it.

We are being attacked all over the world by radical Islamic extremists that have grown in power.The sooner that is dealt with the better.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4791
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 04 Dec 2015, 12:18 pm

It would be good to understand whether the dots could have been connected before the shooting, with existing technology and existing laws. She was born in Pakistan and he traveled to Saudi Arabia. Were there other posts on Facebook besides the one right before the shooting? Should there have been cross checking between the guns that were legally purchased and the countries they traveled to and were from? What websites did they visit and what limits authorities from collecting data on that? Do we need better technology? Do we need better laws? Or do we just wait for this to happen again?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6866
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 04 Dec 2015, 12:37 pm

You can bet that I am not "just for waiting around"...
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15952
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 04 Dec 2015, 1:11 pm

bbauska wrote:Shall the ones who incite violence be censured as well in this case, as was suggested in another forum?
Yes. Of course. And especially where it was criminal. Dumb question.

Wasn't this a "gun free zone"?
Maybe. Colorado Springs is an "open-carry" zone and that didn't stop the mass shooting there.

Doesn't California have tough gun laws?
Not especially.

Aren't explosives illegal in California?
As much as they are in most places.

HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN WITH ALL THESE LAWS IN PLACE?
Because you need to invest in enforcing them too. Even then they will not be perfect. But the question is how to reduce risk.

We are being attacked all over the world by radical Islamic extremists that have grown in power.The sooner that is dealt with the better.
So far this year there have been 355 mass shootings in the USA. How many dead, and how many of those at the hands of Islamists.

And by far the main victims of Islamic violence are Muslims.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15952
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 04 Dec 2015, 1:17 pm

bbauska wrote:You can bet that I am not "just for waiting around"...

So what are you "for".
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6866
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 04 Dec 2015, 2:19 pm

danivon wrote:
bbauska wrote:You can bet that I am not "just for waiting around"...

So what are you "for".


And let you drive the debate to running my position down? I will stand with my position that I wouldn't wait.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15952
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 04 Dec 2015, 2:44 pm

bbauska wrote:
danivon wrote:
bbauska wrote:You can bet that I am not "just for waiting around"...

So what are you "for".


And let you drive the debate to running my position down? I will stand with my position that I wouldn't wait.

If your position is cogent an defensible, what would you have to worry about?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10979
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 05 Dec 2015, 1:52 pm

ray
would be good to understand whether the dots could have been connected before the shooting, with existing technology and existing laws. She was born in Pakistan and he traveled to Saudi Arabia. Were there other posts on Facebook besides the one right before the shooting? Should there have been cross checking between the guns that were legally purchased and the countries they traveled to and were from? What websites did they visit and what limits authorities from collecting data on that? Do we need better technology? Do we need better laws? Or do we just wait for this to happen again
?

when there was an explosion of deaths in car accidents in the late 50s and 60s there was a great deal of research done on the issue. As a result there were changes in care design, changes in laws concerning driving, increased public education on things like drinking and driving, and changes in the way laws for driving were enforced. Some of these changes involved restrictions on peoples freedoms, and some involved changes in care designs enforced by national standards for safety.
as a result of this driving deaths have steadily declined.
The Republican Party has voted to deny the use of federal funds by the CDC in research on guns safety.... This is a public health issue. And when the safety of the public is concerned shouldn't politicians want as much information as possible to help them arrive at good policy decisions?
When politicians say they are concerned for the safety of the public but won't fund research on gun safety ... they aren't being sincere.

Ray, some of the things you mention (following people fro website to website) are infringements on liberty and privacy. I take it that you are prepared to forgo certain liberties in the interest of public safety. Is the freedom to own guns one of them? How far would you go to limit gun ownership if it meant thousand of lives would be saved?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4791
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 05 Dec 2015, 3:06 pm

rickyp wrote:ray
would be good to understand whether the dots could have been connected before the shooting, with existing technology and existing laws. She was born in Pakistan and he traveled to Saudi Arabia. Were there other posts on Facebook besides the one right before the shooting? Should there have been cross checking between the guns that were legally purchased and the countries they traveled to and were from? What websites did they visit and what limits authorities from collecting data on that? Do we need better technology? Do we need better laws? Or do we just wait for this to happen again
?

when there was an explosion of deaths in car accidents in the late 50s and 60s there was a great deal of research done on the issue. As a result there were changes in care design, changes in laws concerning driving, increased public education on things like drinking and driving, and changes in the way laws for driving were enforced. Some of these changes involved restrictions on peoples freedoms, and some involved changes in care designs enforced by national standards for safety.
as a result of this driving deaths have steadily declined.
The Republican Party has voted to deny the use of federal funds by the CDC in research on guns safety.... This is a public health issue. And when the safety of the public is concerned shouldn't politicians want as much information as possible to help them arrive at good policy decisions?
When politicians say they are concerned for the safety of the public but won't fund research on gun safety ... they aren't being sincere.

Ray, some of the things you mention (following people fro website to website) are infringements on liberty and privacy. I take it that you are prepared to forgo certain liberties in the interest of public safety. Is the freedom to own guns one of them? How far would you go to limit gun ownership if it meant thousand of lives would be saved?


Thanks for the history lesson Ricky.

Yes, I would restrict gun ownership quite a bit.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 06 Dec 2015, 4:27 am

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... nd-station

If this had happened in the US the attacker would almost certainly have used a gun, and probably killed several people. Just sayin...
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10979
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 06 Dec 2015, 10:24 am

ray
Yes, I would restrict gun ownership quite a bit.


To what extent? Would you require licensing for both owners and individual guns? Require specific insurance requirements? Would you require safer gun design? Out law weapons of specific design?


Right now, someone on the terror watch list can still go buy a gun. They can't fly, but they can buy guns and ammo,
Politicians who are making pronouncements about their primary concern being the safety of citizens have voted against prohibiting those on the watch list from gun ownership. Because, apparently some people on the watch list might be there by mistake. (Rubio, Cruz)

The same people express the fear that two years of vetting won't be enough to ferret out ISIS sympathizers from rue refugees but willing accept the danger that the provision of firearms to those under suspicion of terrorist sympathy, How iis it possible to express primary concern for citizens safety while supporting the right of watch listed persons to buy guns is a mystery...

Perhaps someone could explain how it is possible t bole these two views at the same time?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15952
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 06 Dec 2015, 11:07 am

Sassenach wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/05/suspect-custody-after-stabbing-leytonstone-london-underground-station

If this had happened in the US the attacker would almost certainly have used a gun, and probably killed several people. Just sayin...
And I suspect a heckle like "You ain't no Muslim, bruv" would not have happened either.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 06 Dec 2015, 12:04 pm

In fairness, there are very few places in America where another muslim would have been present.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 06 Dec 2015, 1:27 pm

Sassenach wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/05/suspect-custody-after-stabbing-leytonstone-london-underground-station

If this had happened in the US the attacker would almost certainly have used a gun, and probably killed several people. Just sayin...


So, which is the danger, the gun or the ideology?

Further, what do we do as a society when individual weapons more lethal than guns are available?

Of course, I'm referencing the light saber.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3047
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 06 Dec 2015, 1:37 pm

" firearm officers were not needed ". One officer with a taser subdued a guy with a knife . Impressive.