What the world needs now - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 12:24 PM - Thread Starter
 
madmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Country
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In response to the new "Conceal and Carry" legislation in our state, I just want to tell the republican congress, bravo!! I am positive that putting more guns on the street, and making it easier to obtain and conceal firearms will make us all much "safer." Well done!!

Instead of settling disputes with, (God forbid) reason, we can all just take it outside and fill eachother with holes because we'll all be packin' heat! -Good thinking!!

Now I think the next step is to make it legal to drive an Abrahms tank to work. Think of it. Nobody would ever cut you off in traffic again.

Hmmm, I wonder how much I would have to pay for a slightly used bazooka? One that was owned by a little old lady from Pasadena, and only fired on special occasions.


What the World Needs Now!!

What the world needs now
is guns, sweet guns!
They make a small man tough
And there just ain’t e-nough
What the world needs now
is guns, sweet guns!
No not just for some, but for everyone

A BB gun is lots of fun for the little ones
Gotta teach the little nippers to kill
Forget all about feeding the hungry
And healthcare is just for the ill

What the world needs now
is guns, sweet guns!
They make a small man tough
And there just ain’t e-nough
What the world needs now
is guns, sweet guns!
No not just for some, but for everyone

If every car came equipped with a gun rack
Traffic altercations would be no more
Education is quite overrated
compared to a Colt .44

What the world needs now
is guns, sweet guns!
They make a small man tough
And there just ain’t e-nough
What the world needs now
is guns, sweet guns!
No not just for some, but for everyone

A .38 will put an end to a bar fight
And domestic quarrels sure wouldn’t last
Battered women shelters sure won't be needed
Marriage counsling is a thing of the past

What the world needs now
is guns, sweet guns!
They make a small man tough
And there just ain’t e-nough
What the world needs now
is guns, sweet guns!
No not just for some, but for everyone

-Madmax
madmax is offline  
#2 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 12:33 PM
 
Devi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
:LOL


Edited to add link to midi file for those who would like to hear the tune as they read.

Beware of pop-ups....

What the world needs now...
Devi is offline  
#3 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 01:29 PM - Thread Starter
 
madmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Country
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks for the link.
madmax is offline  
#4 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 05:29 PM - Thread Starter
 
madmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Country
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
No Iowans were hurt in the making of this poem.
madmax is offline  
#5 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 05:58 PM
 
Deirdre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: A Liberal Utopia
Posts: 2,721
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
dhlotusdebi2

Perhaps you should see "Bowling for Columbine" YOu are still more likely to be killed by a gun in this country than any other industialized country on earth. It's called FEAR and as far as I am concerned our gun happy little country is consumed with it. Quite sad.

Yeah, let's everyone get a gun we'll all be so much safer :

~Deirdre
Deirdre is offline  
#6 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 06:04 PM - Thread Starter
 
madmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Country
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I edited this so people don't misunderstand the point I was trying to make.

madmax is offline  
#7 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 06:05 PM
Banned
 
frogertgrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: location, location, location
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by dh2lotusdeb
Its a good thing.
Let's leave Martha Stewart out of this.

If you want to assert that violent crime decreases in states providing more protection for guns, please do so.

You imply that I'm safer in my state if concealed guns are permitted. I'd love to see some evidence of that!
frogertgrl is offline  
#8 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 06:10 PM - Thread Starter
 
madmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Country
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Crime Rates according to the NRA

Deirdre I agree.

Look at the murder rate in Minnesota in 1994 3.1 %... In Alaska it was 6.4 %. So one could conclude the murder rate is 2x higher in a 'conceal and carry' state than it is in Minnesota...

Also, how many convieniently unmentioned cases of accidental death or injury are there of children who just happened to find daddy's gun?
madmax is offline  
#9 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 06:16 PM - Thread Starter
 
madmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Country
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
The research conducted by Stanford University law professor John Donohue found that the 13 states that adopted right-to-carry gun laws after 1992 had a sharp increases in murder and other violent-crime rates, compared with states without such laws.
Studies indicate violent crime increases with conceal and carry laws...
madmax is offline  
#10 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 06:30 PM
 
Deirdre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: A Liberal Utopia
Posts: 2,721
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
NYC had an amazing drop in crime in the 90's because they decided to get "tough on crime" and returned to neighborhood patrols by police. Add to that a booming economy and lo and behold, major drops in crime. Had nothing to do with a large jump in NYCers packin handguns.

I would prefer to work for a healthy and booming economy, quality education, affordable healthcare and job opportunities to create a safer society than put my efforts towards ensuring everyone can carry a gun to make me feel safer. Just a different perspective on the world.

Anyway, in the end it comes down to how you want to live: in fear or not.

Good little essay here about that:

To stop our downward spiral of fear, we must cleanse ourselves of ill will

Madmax, I liked your song
Deirdre is offline  
#11 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 06:39 PM
 
Devi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by frogertgrl
Let's leave Martha Stewart out of this.
:LOL

Also Max, thanks for the link to the centerfire page. If you take out three states from their statistics. DC, Alabama and Louisiana you get a very similar murder rate between the two models.

Quote:
originally posted by Dierdra I would prefer to work for a healthy and booming economy, quality education, affordable healthcare and job opportunities to create a safer society than put my efforts towards ensuring everyone can carry a gun to make me feel safer. Just a different perspective on the world.
Devi is offline  
#12 of 24 Old 04-29-2003, 06:39 PM
 
SummerLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I've lived in this state for over 20 years despite the piece of crap, 35 below zero, 9 month long winters. I've stayed because somehow it was different. Now we're no different. Everything that made this state something other than a cold hell hole is fast disappearing and now people can carry concealed weapons. Why, so those that are now denied health care, food and shelter for themselves and their kids by the current administration won't get too close when they ask for help?. What crap.

Somebody tell me to stay and fight, because I am losing heart.
SummerLover is offline  
#13 of 24 Old 04-30-2003, 01:24 AM
 
Devi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Summerlover Somebody tell me to stay and fight, because I am losing heart.
I would ask you to stay and fight mama, but I'd be a hypocrate ... At least stay until I'm gone though ok???

Quote:
Originally posted by dh2lotusdeb
first, comparing two numbers for a given population (in this case # of murders and total population) is not, by itself, valid ...


UHM, I think that's the point Max was trying to make ....

I am glad you brought it up again however as it is the 'exact' the type of 'research' the pro-gun lobby used in Madmax's link to justify it's "Guns are good" stance.

Quote:
Originally posted by dh2lotusdeb
... "what is the effect of concealed carry on crime rates?" ...


See here

Quote:
13 states that adopted right-to-carry gun laws after 1992 had a sharp increases in murder and other violent-crime rates, compared with states without such laws.


And here...

Quote:
While crime may have dropped in concealed-carry states, crime has generally dropped more in the other states ... supporters of concealed-carry laws "are not enthusiastic about noting that crime fell more in the states that didn't adopt those laws.So they just look at the states that passed them and say, 'Look how crime fell.'"


Regarding the 300 children killed each year by firearms. If that were a correct figure, it would be alarming in and of itself. But it is not correct according to the most recent 'NRA' data (I can find) which puts the figure closer to 4500 per year.

I can't even believe this crap

I do realize the NRA wants each child over the age of 15 'not to be counted' but you see, my child is not expendable at the age of 15.

Devi is offline  
#14 of 24 Old 04-30-2003, 10:24 AM - Thread Starter
 
madmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Country
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If protection of your home is your thing, a shotgun is a much better choice. Just point and click! I think you need to ask yourself, what is the main purpose for the creation of handguns in the first place,- certainly not hunting.

But as per usual, the GOP answer to the public trust is to take away the common man (or woman's) hope, replace it with fear and mistrust, and give them a shiney new box of bullets and a itty- bitty tax cut. I would prefer a good job and healthcare.
madmax is offline  
#15 of 24 Old 04-30-2003, 11:55 AM
 
Ilaria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Currently living in Beijing, China
Posts: 2,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
I would prefer to work for a healthy and booming economy, quality education, affordable healthcare and job opportunities to create a safer society than put my efforts towards ensuring everyone can carry a gun to make me feel safer. Just a different perspective on the world.
AMen!

Ilaria mamma to Owen, Caroline & Patrick .... loving life as expats in Asia intactlact.gifnovaxnocirc.gifuc.jpgnamaste.gif
Ilaria is offline  
#16 of 24 Old 04-30-2003, 12:45 PM
 
Devi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by dh2lotusdeb
Take a look at studies by John Lott and Gary Kleck. They're pretty much the gold standard for research into gun policy.


Those studies 'were' examined and refuted in the information posted. Please read the information in the links provided...

Quote:
Originally posted by dh2lotusdeb
Those of us on the pro-gun side really don't like the albatross of criminal misuse (where a lot of 15+ shootings fall) being hung around our necks, especially when it is in a soundbite of 10-15 children a day die from firearms accidents -- give up your guns!


No one has claimed 15 children die each day from firearms 'accidents.' The claim was 13 children die each day from 'firearm related fatalities', which is correct.

Also what do you mean by 'the albatross of criminal misuse?' Are you saying that a 15 year old shot by a 'criminal' doesn't count?!?!?! In other words each child over 15 who was killed at Columbine (and else where) is just an 'albatross'??

And ... while were on the subject I think you should see the movie "Bowling ...." I think you've got your facts wrong.

Quote:
(A lot of us would really like to respond: GO BE A PARENT, NOT AN ANTI-GUN POLITICIAN!)
With all due respect, I can't even go here with you.
Devi is offline  
#17 of 24 Old 04-30-2003, 08:17 PM
 
Devi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by dh2lotusdeb
jointogether.org? I think not ...
Why because they came to a different conclusion then the NRA? Is everyone 'disqualified' (in your mind) who disagrees with the 'pro-gun' lobby?

Quote:
If a teenager chooses their own path of criminal behaviour, why and why must those of us who are lawful citizens be held accountable for it?

It would be like everyone who owns a car being held responsible for hit and run drivers.

Or everyone who owns a knife being held up to the spotlight for someone who commits a crime with one. Or ...


Quote:
Regarding Michael Moore you said~I hope they do revoke his Oscar.
I have read your links. : It's obvious to me that most of those who wrote negative things about the movie have probably never even seen it.

Michael Moore Defends Bowling...

Quote:
With all the hoopla surrounding objectivity in Moore's documentary, the filmmaker actually makes no claim to such a genre. "I don't know if you should call it a documentary," Moore said. "I think it's a nonfiction film.
Alternet.

Quote:
If you're comparing Moore's work to a sepia-toned Ken Burns opus, it's easy to see where the criticism comes from. "Bowling for Columbine" aims for the gut, throws big ideas into the ring and doesn't really grapple with all of them. But it is gripping and powerful; it grabs you by the heartstrings and makes you laugh at your assumptions. And precisely because Moore does not pretend to answer all of the questions he raises, "Bowling for Columbine" is that rarest of beasts: A movie that makes you feel, and then makes you think.
Guardian

Quote:
Bowling for Columbine was a personal journey for Moore; he had been a marksmanship champion as a teenager and is a lifelong member of the NRA.
Im out now all.
Devi is offline  
#18 of 24 Old 04-30-2003, 09:48 PM
 
Deirdre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: A Liberal Utopia
Posts: 2,721
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
dhlotusdebi2~It seems that you know little about Moore's film if you actually think that whether or not the Columbine killers went bowling that morning has_anything_to do with the movie.

Moore's work is about America and our culture of violence and fear. Perhaps you can point me to an NRA funded "study" they are working on "prove" that we don't live in a culture of violence and fear :LOL

Anyway,it seems silly to debate the opinion a person has about a movie he has never seen. So I won't.

~Deirdre

edited to add: you may want to see the movie if nothing else so you can tell your NRA friends to never, ever let Charlton Heston do an unscripted interview with Michael Moore again. Let's just say he didn't come off sounding like the brightest bulb in the box
Deirdre is offline  
#19 of 24 Old 04-30-2003, 10:21 PM
 
amy mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: miami, fl
Posts: 953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by dh2lotusdeb
[. Those of us on the pro-gun side really don't like the albatross of criminal misuse (where a lot of 15+ shootings fall) being hung around our necks[/B]


Yes, I'm sure you don't. How inconvenient to be expected to answer to the thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands (thirty or so thousand I think) of grieving parents each year. How much nicer to just sit back, and listen to the sounds of freedom ring out at the shooting range. And in our offices. And our schools. And our homes. And on our streets. And in our stores.
amy mama is offline  
#20 of 24 Old 05-01-2003, 01:42 PM - Thread Starter
 
madmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Country
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
How ironic it is that a majority of the people who are for this type of legislation consider themselves "pro life" advocates. I guess that only applies to the unborn.
madmax is offline  
#21 of 24 Old 05-01-2003, 03:02 PM
 
lotusdebi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Facebook
Posts: 6,653
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

You can find me on Facebook. PM for info.
lotusdebi is offline  
#22 of 24 Old 05-02-2003, 03:38 PM
 
Devi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by dh2lotusdeb
That is called bias. Sorta like 'research' where you select your conclusion, and then go find data to support it. [/B]
Everything that comes out of your mouth is direct from the NRA and the 'pro-gun' lobby so what's your point? Or, aren't your sources biased. : Anyone who comes out with a different opinion then the one you want to hear is 'biased' though right?

In addition, lets see your back up information, you spout much but provide very little in the way of actual data. When you do, it's refuted. Oh, wait, that's right, those that disagree with the NRA are not credible.

There have been numerous studies done at Universities around the Globe regarding Hand Guns and violence. I'm sure you are aware of that. I am sure you are also aware of the most interesting statistic. You and your family are much more likely to be killed by your guns than some un-knowm assailant. (Sleep tight.)

Quote:
Hope you have a big yard, a strong back, and lot of spare shovels ... you're gonna need them.
I think your the one who needs a 'shovel' my friend.

Amazingly, I've been alive for almost 40 years and have yet to be killed, in spite of the fact that I don't carry a fire arm

I have lived in some of the most dangerous parts of various cities, and I'm still around???

I have many more links and information to provide you with when you provide your 'back up' information.

And, by the way this is about 'conceal and carry' legislation, not 'banning all guns' so lets try not to panic here.
Devi is offline  
#23 of 24 Old 05-02-2003, 04:25 PM
 
Devi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
8 independant places that expressed intense disdain for Moore's work, the NRA not being amongst them.
You call those 'independant' sources? :LOL

Quote:
So, where are all these pro-gun lobby things I'm quoting and that have been refuted? They don't exist. Why? Sorry, the _actual research_ is one-sided, and it doesn't look good for the anti-gun position.
Oh, but they do exist... Allow me to illustrate once again. Perhaps you won't like the fact that I've provided information from 'consolidated' sources. My apologies in advance.

And, talk about BS studies see here..
Scientific studies...NOT!


Also, DH2 you'd best go back and re-read. YOUR information has been refuted and very credibly so. Also, John Lott is an embarassment to your cause. I think I'd find a new hero if I were you.

Quote:
"Lott, however, has come under intense recent criticism for his work. First, Julian Sanchez, a pro-gun, libertarian Cato Institute researcher, found evidence that Lott had created a fictitious soulmate named Mary Rosh to glowingly review his work on the Internet. Second, Northwestern University law professor James Lindgren reported that he had investigated Lott's claim of a 1997 survey which found that "98 percent of the time that people use guns defensively, they merely have to brandish a weapon to break off an attack," and found no evidence of the survey's existence."

If things weren't already bad enough for Lott and his supporters, they've just gotten worse. The new Brookings Institution Press book, a collection of new research findings on gun policy, contains an article by two law professors who have reworked the Lott data and come up with conclusions that contradict him. The article, written by professors John Donohue of Stanford Law School and Ian Ayres of Yale Law School, summarize that "if anything there is stronger evidence for the conclusion that these laws increase crime than there is for the conclusion that they decrease it."
And, regarding Gary Klecks numbers...

Quote:
Gun control advocates say firearms are used 108,000 times a year for self-defense. Gun control opponents say the figure is as high as 2.5 million times a year.

Whom do you believe?
The 108,000 figure comes from the Justice Department’s National Crime Victimization Survey, the nation’s most comprehensive survey of victims. But gun control opponents discount the number, arguing that many people who used guns to protect themselves successfully don’t consider themselves victims and thus are not counted by the study.
They prefer the 2.5 million estimate from Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, who surveyed 5,000 households and examined other studies. Gun control advocates reject Kleck’s conclusions because, they say, his sample size was too small to be accurate.
ABC News Story

I think I'd re-think my 2.5 million figure DH2. Based on 'surveys' of 5,000 people?

Also, we both know that If the 108,000 - 2.5 million people who defended themselves last year did not have a gun in tow, they would not necessarilly have been murdered regardless. They may have been robbed, had a purse stolen, been mooned?? We don't know, do we? So, you should correct your # of dead figures you tossed out previously to AmyMama.

Multiple sources of information are quoted here

The Centers for Disease Control
Journal of Trauma
American Journal of Public Health
U.S. Department of Justice
Injury Prevention
University of Chicago
ATF report, Crime Gun Trace Analysis
Johns Hopkins University

Also, I'm sure you know this...?

Quote:
A gun in the home is 22 times more likely to be used in an unintentional shooting, a criminal assault or homicide, or an attempted or completed suicide than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense. Journal of Trauma, 1998
K, enough hogging the threads, I've got to get outta here man!



DH2, we can ramble till were in the face. It will do no good. So I leave you in peace and harmony to polish your Gun collection

Devi is offline  
#24 of 24 Old 05-30-2004, 09:27 PM
Banned
 
supernaut76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OK...if someone is so irresponsible and not-in-control-of-themselves that they WOULD go settle an arguement with a gun, what's to stop them from tucking it in their waistband, permit or not? I hope that isn't what you'd do if you were handed a gun. Murderers are generally NOT law-abiding citizens. And many criminals, particularly murderers and sexual predators, don't listen to 'reason.' They don't care if you feel sorry for them, but the threat of their life ending with a squeeze of the trigger MIGHT just be enough to convince them to leave. If more of these violent, unreasonable, mentally unstable criminals start turning up dead, maybe the others will think twice before accosting you, because there is a chance that you might be carrying a gun. If you don't wish to protect yourself, fine, but don't restrict the right of your fellowperson to. Regardless of what you might believe, the world IS a dangerous, unpredictable place. To carry a gun is not to show irrational fear, but to demonstrate that you realize the inherent risks of living and choose to tilt the odds in your favor, like buckling your seatbelt. If you do choose to carry, though, pursue training, and become very proficient. Maybe you'll never need it, I hope you don't, but if the time comes, you'll stand a better chance of living to tell about it.

I will say again, B4C was designed as an award-winning propaganda piece. I will also say that criminals like breaking laws. How do DC, NYC, LA, and Chicago have so many murders with such strict gun control? The bad guys get guns anyway. Why should you be legislatively disadvantaged?
supernaut76 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off