Obama Says America Needs 'Soul-Searching' On Gun Violence

[koheesti]

For soul searching you need a soul. On the gun control issue, America had a soul, but the NRA bought it. Nothing will be done. Everyone knows nothing will be done. The nation that used to be can do is now morphing into mai bpen rai.

Quit trying to demonize the NRA. The NRA is and have been for tough laws against CRIMINALS using guns while committing a crime.The anti-gun lobby doesn't even want the overwhelmingly vast majority (tens of millions) of LAW-ABIDING gun owners to have a gun.

It's the Liberals who are for letting the criminals off with a slap on the wrist. Perhaps if they were as tough on crime as the NRA, there would be less gun crime.

I laugh to think anyone believes certain messages conveyed by the NRA.

It is not liberals doing anything to let criminals off with a slap on the wrist. You are just spewing ignorance based rhetoric utilized to deflect blame and attention and unfortunately certain other impressionable people may hear, believe and respew the same ignorance to others. Eventually, if enough people hear they ridiculous information will fall on ears guidable enough to believe.

Judges in the US have to follow very strict sentencing guidelines regardless as to whether they are liberal or conservative. Very little room for discretion or subjectivity, especially if a higher grade crime.

I could go into full detail how sentencing guidelines work, what policies are at issue, what presumptions appy due to our jails being over capacity, what grades of offenses are entitled to certain presumptions and how little discretion a judge has in sentencing. This would take pages though.

Upon graduating law school, I clerked for an appellate court judge and a Supreme

Court Justice and reviewed many sentences metted out by judges so I know the guidelines.

Statements like yours are intellectually dishonest tactics to try and deflect from the root of the problems. Sad to say, many ignorant, guilable and impressionable people buy into such hype and believe what they are ready to believe.

So basically, you just have an issue with the Liberals and slap-on-the-wrist comment? Or do you disagree that the NRA is for tough laws for crimes involving guns too?

[koheesti]

. NRA is bug money just like oil and Big pharma.

More like a tiny drop in the bucket compared to union money. I've provided the link showing the raw numbers. Read at your own risk of learning that the NRA, oil companies and pharma are small time.

[koheesti]

The beauty of concealed weapons is that they also protect people who are not armed. The fact that a person could be armed prevents criminals from taking a chance. When I lived out in the boonies on a farm in Ohio, I can assure you that 90 percent or more of those farm homes had weapons. Criminals who are at least reasonably intelligent would not take a chance trying to pick one of the 10 percent that are not armed.

Recently, on the Internet, I saw a picture of a sign on the lawn of a guy's home that said that he had guns. There was a big arrow pointing to the next house that said that guy believed in gun control. That expression of free speech is being challenged. The sign was only telling the truth. What is wrong with telling the truth? Could it be that the gun control advocates are actually afraid of the criminals?

Free speech? BS - sounds like the neighbour who put up the sign is in a dispute & being a complete moron. Doesn't the US have the right to privacy laws? Lucky the neighbour hasn't changed his mind and got a weapon - it's an overt threat

There is a photo circulating of a sign in someone's front yard but it has obviously been photoshopped so it isn't real.

[koheesti]

So you want to pass more laws when they can't enforce what they already have? It is illegal for convicted felons to have guns but many if not most armed criminals are convicted felons. Career criminals pay no attention to laws and more laws only hurt honest people.

I stand behind my opinion that armed citizens protect not only themselves but also those who choose not to arm themselves. I have no other answers or solutions.

If outlawing guns will stop gun crime, then outlawing crime in general will stop all crime.

[ttelise]

For soul searching you need a soul. On the gun control issue, America had a soul, but the NRA bought it. Nothing will be done. Everyone knows nothing will be done. The nation that used to be can do is now morphing into mai bpen rai.

Quit trying to demonize the NRA. The NRA is and have been for tough laws against CRIMINALS using guns while committing a crime.The anti-gun lobby doesn't even want the overwhelmingly vast majority (tens of millions) of LAW-ABIDING gun owners to have a gun.

It's the Liberals who are for letting the criminals off with a slap on the wrist. Perhaps if they were as tough on crime as the NRA, there would be less gun crime.

I laugh to think anyone believes certain messages conveyed by the NRA.

It is not liberals doing anything to let criminals off with a slap on the wrist. You are just spewing ignorance based rhetoric utilized to deflect blame and attention and unfortunately certain other impressionable people may hear, believe and respew the same ignorance to others. Eventually, if enough people hear they ridiculous information will fall on ears guidable enough to believe.

Judges in the US have to follow very strict sentencing guidelines regardless as to whether they are liberal or conservative. Very little room for discretion or subjectivity, especially if a higher grade crime.

I could go into full detail how sentencing guidelines work, what policies are at issue, what presumptions appy due to our jails being over capacity, what grades of offenses are entitled to certain presumptions and how little discretion a judge has in sentencing. This would take pages though.

Upon graduating law school, I clerked for an appellate court judge and a Supreme

Court Justice and reviewed many sentences metted out by judges so I know the guidelines.

Statements like yours are intellectually dishonest tactics to try and deflect from the root of the problems. Sad to say, many ignorant, guilable and impressionable people buy into such hype and believe what they are ready to believe.

Since you are a self admitted attorney and former Supreme Court clerk, I presume you know how to add or propose amendments to the US Constitution. If not, check out Article V.

The real problem for people like yourself that advocate gun control is not with the guns. It is with the Constitution's Second Amendment calling for the people's right to bear arms. If the second amendment is ever removed from the Constitution then you will have your effective gun control.

Until that happens, however, I can only ask why, with your legal background, you are wasting your valuable time by posting anonymously on a Thailand based forum. That time could better be spent making every effort to change the Constitution in the US rather than making vain attempts to change minds in Thailand.

That is the only way for you and others of your frame of mind to ever have gun control...and then you will only have gun control over law abiding citizens. The criminals will always have access to guns.

Haha, the post your responding to addressed inaccurate statements about sentencing in the US.

Gun control like Clinton's ban on assault weapons in 1994 seemed to worked very well early on and perhaps make registration of certain high calibre and high velocity weapons subject to class 3 registration requirements and federal penalties for owning unclassified weapons.

I am cool with people using shot guns and rifles for hunting. Concealed pistols in public and assault weapons is unnecessary.

Ulyesis G 1982 stuff is silly. Back then, guns were not in our schools and people did not walk around packing. High school gang violence was settled with fists. People were scared of guns and death back then, but there was rarely if ever a threat of them in out neighborhoods. Guns are now everywhere and kids are no longer scared of using them or death which is a by product of growing up in grade with the fear if being shot on a daily basis. They hit high school and fear becomes rage and fijck it I ain't afraid to die attitude. Meanwhile, the Lilly white suburbanite who has never leaved in fear and has a lot to lose will hesitate when confronted with a gun situation and just killed quicker since he has a gun but is scared to use it. Better chance of survival if no gun if you are not very proficient with it and unless you truly have no reservation about taking someone's life.

Edited August 9, 2012 by ttelise

[ttelise]

Here is one of the many reasons the NRA's rhetoric is devoid of any merit. NRA adamantly opposes the gun show loop hole. Let's examine how the works.

An undercover TV crew with a hidden camera recently visited a gun show in Texas. The set up would be a private dealer sitting next to a licensed dealer on and on throughout the facility.

The undercover guys would walk up to the private dealers, all being tapped, and say we want to buy AK, AR 15 or whatever and always throw in a passing remark about if back ground check is required stating they probably would not pass a back ground check.

The private seller would typically point to guy sitting next to him and say "he cares, but I don't care.". He would then sell the assault rifles to these under cover guys.

These guys said this over and over and left with numerous AK47s, AR15s and etc.

NOT ONCE did anyone decline to sell assault rifles even though the under cover guys said they probably would not pass a background check.

The private seller then could just purchase more guns from dealer sitting next to him for sale at these shows to people who cannot pass background checks, the mist of which were from Mexico. So both the gun dealer is also make huge profits from these sales.

The worst part, to me, was that the under cover guys were stopped by a couple if Mexican guys with Mexican tags and they offered like $5,000 a gun for the AKs and AR15s. The under cover guys said no, nut later the Mexican guys left the gun show with more assault rifles than they could carry.

So call it what you like, the manufacturers are getting huge volume and the gun dealers just sell to private dealers who sell at gun shows to anyone, no questions asked.

Edited August 9, 2012 by ttelise

[ttelise]

So you want to pass more laws when they can't enforce what they already have? It is illegal for convicted felons to have guns but many if not most armed criminals are convicted felons. Career criminals pay no attention to laws and more laws only hurt honest people.

I stand behind my opinion that armed citizens protect not only themselves but also those who choose not to arm themselves. I have no other answers or solutions.

If outlawing guns will stop gun crime, then outlawing crime in general will stop all crime.

Most criminals in US are neither afraid of jail nor death so pushing for stricter crimes has no impact on majority of criminals. Jail is safer than living in fear on the streets and they get food and shelter. This mentality really only works on people with something to lose, most of which don't run around and shoot people.

[koheesti]

Most criminals in US are neither afraid of jail nor death so pushing for stricter crimes has no impact on majority of criminals.

We agree there - stricter laws won't help the situation.

Jail is safer than living in fear on the streets and they get food and shelter. This mentality really only works on people with something to lose, most of which don't run around and shoot people.

This is another good point most people don't seem to understand. To someone from a comfy middle-class or higher background, the thought of going to prison is a nightmare. They can understand that to some other segments of society, prison offers food and shelter. This mentality is also seen with some homeless men. People from comfortable backgrounds can't see the attraction of the freedom of living on the street with no rules to follow. That's why a lot of homeless avoid shelters - roof or not, there are too many rules. People need to keep in mind what is unacceptable to some people, is not unacceptable to everyone.

[ttelise]

Most criminals in US are neither afraid of jail nor death so pushing for stricter crimes has no impact on majority of criminals.

We agree there - stricter laws won't help the situation.

Jail is safer than living in fear on the streets and they get food and shelter. This mentality really only works on people with something to lose, most of which don't run around and shoot people.

This is another good point most people don't seem to understand. To someone from a comfy middle-class or higher background, the thought of going to prison is a nightmare. They can understand that to some other segments of society, prison offers food and shelter. This mentality is also seen with some homeless men. People from comfortable backgrounds can't see the attraction of the freedom of living on the street with no rules to follow. That's why a lot of homeless avoid shelters - roof or not, there are too many rules. People need to keep in mind what is unacceptable to some people, is not unacceptable to everyone.

Very common for gang members near or in border states to run to US authorities and ask to be arrested. When they mess up the alternative is much worse.

These gangs literally bound people's feet and hands and beat them with a baseball bat ensuring not to hit the head or spine so they won't die, pass out or stop feeling pain. They then proceed to shatter almost every bone in their body.

After the savage beating they get castrated, beheaded while still alive and dismembered. Some are dismembered alive. Hundreds of tortured, mutilated and dismembered bodies turn up weekly or monthly in both Mexico and in the border states. Many are videoed and placed on the web at various sites.

Jail got nothing on that.

Edited August 9, 2012 by ttelise

[geriatrickid]

I think this thread highlights some significant cultural differences: Americans seem to be gripped by paranoia and live in fear of "threats", which they think are best countered by carrying a gun.

This article highlights the point. It's about a U.S. cop that was visitng Calgary, Canada, Canada's conservative heartland. He wasn't in some leftie paradise, but smack dab in the middle of Canada's right wing core, where gun ownership is considered a fundamental right and where gun ownership is high. The American saw a threat that did not exist and is now the subject of online ridicule from the Canada's conservative and gun owning heartland, with the newsmedia that leans to the right leading the charge . And no it is not a hoax.

An American tourist who felt the need to pack heat in a Calgary park has set off a storm of social media ridicule. And now it’s emerging that the “very aggressive” strangers he encountered may have just been representatives from an oil company giving out free passes to the Stampede. http://news.national.../09/walt-wawra/

http://gawker.com/59...-confrontation/

The twitter universe is filled with ridicule and derision for this man.

Sadly, this police officer from Michigan and a great many Americans don't get it and never will.

The people he wanted to point his gun at and perhaps even shoot were just being overly friendly and were maybe handing out free passes to the Calgary Stampede.

Edited August 10, 2012 by geriatrickid

[Ulysses G.]

The people he wanted to point his gun at and perhaps even shoot were just being overly friendly and were maybe handing out free passes to the Calgary Stampede.

Yeah, but they were Canadians!

[GiHadOrange]

Here is one of the many reasons the NRA's rhetoric is devoid of any merit. NRA adamantly opposes the gun show loop hole. Let's examine how the works.

An undercover TV crew with a hidden camera recently visited a gun show in Texas. ...

You should also examine how such TV shows work.

[GiHadOrange]

I think this thread highlights some significant cultural differences: Americans seem to be gripped by paranoia and live in fear of "threats", which they think are best countered by carrying a gun.

This article highlights the point. It's about a U.S. cop that was visitng Calgary, Canada, Canada's conservative heartland. He wasn't in some leftie paradise, but smack dab in the middle of Canada's right wing core, where gun ownership is considered a fundamental right and where gun ownership is high. The American saw a threat that did not exist and is now the subject of online ridicule from the Canada's conservative and gun owning heartland, with the newsmedia that leans to the right leading the charge . And no it is not a hoax.

An American tourist who felt the need to pack heat in a Calgary park has set off a storm of social media ridicule. And now it’s emerging that the “very aggressive” strangers he encountered may have just been representatives from an oil company giving out free passes to the Stampede. http://news.national.../09/walt-wawra/

http://gawker.com/59...-confrontation/

The twitter universe is filled with ridicule and derision for this man.

Sadly, this police officer from Michigan and a great many Americans don't get it and never will.

The people he wanted to point his gun at and perhaps even shoot were just being overly friendly and were maybe handing out free passes to the Calgary Stampede.

Let's have a look at the soul searching quality of your argument.

A tourist wrote a letter to the editor, right?

What makes you think that he was a) not a troll and b ) can be seen as prime example for many Americans who don't get it?

[GiHadOrange]

No one needs to do anything other than eat or drink. There is nothing wrong with hunting or target practice if someone needs food or just enjoys the sport of trying to hit a bullseye.

* A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:

• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"

• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"

• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"

Your source is the internet, right? So it must be right, right?

[koheesti]

I'm currently in Ukraine and met an Austrian man and his two teenage sons last week. They were very nice people and in discussions we talked about guns and America's love for them - not something easy for Europeans to understand. We talked about it because the next morning they were going to one of those tourist shooting ranges where you can shoot an AK-47 (not fully automatic), Dragunov sniper rifle, an older WWII rifle, a Russian assault shotgun and a pistol. I told them that after shooting those that they would better understand why millions of law-abiding gun owners in America don't want to give up their right to bear arms. I saw them again the next evening and, of course, they had a great time shooting.

There is nothing wrong with guns. Guns are not the problem. I'm not a gun owner but guns don't scare me in the slightest. The problems, and this is what does scare me, are the criminals and crazy people.

Edited August 10, 2012 by koheesti

[geriatrickid]

I'm currently in Ukraine and met an Austrian man and his two teenage sons last week. They were very nice people and in discussions we talked about guns and America's love for them - not something easy for Europeans to understand. We talked about it because the next morning they were going to one of those tourist shooting ranges where you can shoot an AK-47 (not fully automatic), Dragunov sniper rifle, an older WWII rifle, a Russian assault shotgun and a pistol. I told them that after shooting those that they would better understand why millions of law-abiding gun owners in America don't want to give up their right to bear arms. I saw them again the next evening and, of course, they had a great time shooting.

There is nothing wrong with guns. Guns are not the problem. I'm not a gun owner but guns don't scare me in the slightest. The problems, and this is what does scare me, are the criminals and crazy people.

Unfortunately, there are too many crazy people in the USA that have access to firearms. How does one limit the access of these people to firearms? I learnt to use a firearm ay an early age. I believe I should have the right to own a fiirearm. I resent the government imposing restrictions on my right. However, until such time as someone can come up with a way to keep the guns out of the hands of the nutters, I accept the restrictions.

[geriatrickid]

I think this thread highlights some significant cultural differences: Americans seem to be gripped by paranoia and live in fear of "threats", which they think are best countered by carrying a gun.

This article highlights the point. It's about a U.S. cop that was visitng Calgary, Canada, Canada's conservative heartland. He wasn't in some leftie paradise, but smack dab in the middle of Canada's right wing core, where gun ownership is considered a fundamental right and where gun ownership is high. The American saw a threat that did not exist and is now the subject of online ridicule from the Canada's conservative and gun owning heartland, with the newsmedia that leans to the right leading the charge . And no it is not a hoax.

An American tourist who felt the need to pack heat in a Calgary park has set off a storm of social media ridicule. And now it’s emerging that the “very aggressive” strangers he encountered may have just been representatives from an oil company giving out free passes to the Stampede. http://news.national.../09/walt-wawra/

http://gawker.com/59...-confrontation/

The twitter universe is filled with ridicule and derision for this man.

Sadly, this police officer from Michigan and a great many Americans don't get it and never will.

The people he wanted to point his gun at and perhaps even shoot were just being overly friendly and were maybe handing out free passes to the Calgary Stampede.

Let's have a look at the soul searching quality of your argument.

A tourist wrote a letter to the editor, right?

What makes you think that he was a) not a troll and b ) can be seen as prime example for many Americans who don't get it?

Not a troll because he is a real person that was verified by the newspaper and was contacted by multiple journalists verifying the story.

A good example because it illustrates the mindset of a segment of the population that sees a threat in others.

Toodles.

[koheesti]

Here's an unexpected twist on shootings in America - a man who had volunteered at a LGBT community center walked into a conservative lobbying group the Family Research Council, and opened fire, shooting a security guard before being subdued. He was carrying a box of ammunition and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches in his backpack and was apparently upset with the stance of the restaurant's owner on same sex marriage.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SECURITY_GUARD_SHOT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-08-16-11-10-03

http://www.wtop.com/209/2996023/Man-charged-in-shooting-at-conservative-group-HQ

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57493780/cops-lgbt-volunteer-shoots-conservative-groups-guard/

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2012/08/15/only-abc-offers-full-story-shooting-frc-cbs-nbc-blow-it-tiny-reports#ixzz23ii4uAux

[Ulysses G.]

Just last week someone on this forum was claimimg that only the right was involved in domestic terrorism. Most of these recent nuts have had no rational political agenda at all, but, unfortunately, both sides do have their nutcases.

[chuckd]

Just last week someone on this forum was claimimg that only the right was involved in domestic terrorism. Most of these recent nuts have had no rational political agenda at all, but, unfortunately, both sides do have their nutcases.

Has Obama made a public statement yet?

[KKvampire]

If guns are removed from the public domain then clearly the once a month mass killings in the USA are likely to be reduced , But when those who believe they live in the wild west and cling to the 2nd amendment (or the misinterpretation of it)it makes change difficult. And statements such as "Guns dont kill people, people kill people" from the gun lobby ensure the carnage will continue.

[Ulysses G.]

It is pretty much impossible to get rid of the millions of guns that are out there already.

[koheesti]

If guns are removed from the public domain then clearly the once a month mass killings in the USA are likely to be reduced , But when those who believe they live in the wild west and cling to the 2nd amendment (or the misinterpretation of it)it makes change difficult. And statements such as "Guns dont kill people, people kill people" from the gun lobby ensure the carnage will continue.

"the wild west" LOL Only ignorant people (not you of course, you're just trying to be deceitful) would believe only "shoot first, ask questions later" Dirty Harrys and Wild West outlaws support the 2nd amendment. The vast majority of Americans (Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians) support gun ownership. THAT's why Obama and other politicos haven't pushed it. It has little to do with the NRA because they don't spend nearly as much as the far left (re: Marxists who want to disarm Americans) like to claim. The donation figures are out there for all to see so your spin won't work.

Edited August 17, 2012 by koheesti

[Credo]

It is pretty much impossible to get rid of the millions of guns that are out there already.

Your right. It might be wise to outlaw the selling of ammunition.

[koheesti]

It is pretty much impossible to get rid of the millions of guns that are out there already.

Your right. It might be wise to outlaw the selling of ammunition.

Or just tax it more. That is not in violation of the 2nd amendment.

[Ulysses G.]

Outlawing ammunition seems like a more workable solution to me, but there is plenty of that out there already as well and they would have to also outlaw selling gunpowder and the chemicals to make it as plenty of gun nuts make their own ammo.

None of this stuff would stop someone looking for a gun and ammo, but it would make it a lot more expensive and less convenient to go postal.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Credo]

Yes, but making your own ammunition is a little like rolling your own cigarettes, you end up smoking a lot less.

[chiangmaikelly]

If guns are removed from the public domain then clearly the once a month mass killings in the USA are likely to be reduced , But when those who believe they live in the wild west and cling to the 2nd amendment (or the misinterpretation of it)it makes change difficult. And statements such as "Guns dont kill people, people kill people" from the gun lobby ensure the carnage will continue.

I think you need to remember that there are probably more game animals in the US than when the first Brits arrived, escaping persecution hundreds of years ago (deer overpopulation is now a problem). Hunting is a billion dollar industry in the US. America has has excellent game conservation laws and the sport is funded by hunting licenses. There are more than 12 million active hunters in the US today. But one has to practice. And target practice takes guns and ammo. There are 90 guns per 100 people in the US. Of course not all of those are for hunting. I'm a black powder hunter. I don't buy ammunition. I cast the lead balls and black powder is readily available.

[TheWalkingMan]

Just last week someone on this forum was claimimg that only the right was involved in domestic terrorism. Most of these recent nuts have had no rational political agenda at all, but, unfortunately, both sides do have their nutcases.

Has Obama made a public statement yet?

Why would he make a public statement on an event which has not produced a groundswell of comments over a lengthly (news cycle wise) period of time? It would not make any sense for any President to comment on every high profile gun incident in the US. If he did that, he would never have time for lunch.

[lomatopo]

Some may find this article interesting:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/04/23/120423fa_fact_lepore

(Note that this is the article Fareed Zakaria "borrowed from".)

I am an "Originalist", if you are part of a well-regulated militia you can own a musket, flint-lock pistol or canon!

And I don't get concealed carry laws? Why hide them? Cowboys carried their guns in visible holsters, but did have to check them with the authorities when entering many towns and cities.