CNN Video: guest Alex Jones Slams Piers Morgan

[The Evil Genius]

So which gun specifically is going to protect me when the government decides to use drones to bomb the **** out of Northern California?

[Wrong Direction]

http://www.redstate.com/2013/01/09/t...lence-problem/

The Real Gun Violence Problem
By: Erick Erickson

...

Unfortunately, the incident that set off all these discussions — the Newtown, CT tragedy — is causing policy makers and news figures to fixate on all the wrong things, or at least the things with the least amount of meaning.

The fact is the tragedy in Connecticut was terrible. But it is also not a common act. It is called a “random act of violence” because it is random.

After the shooting over the summer in Aurora, CO, the President and his team could have picked up the gun issue, but they chose not too because it is a political hot potato and hurts the Democrats. They are compensating in light of this new tragedy, but the discussed policy proposals thus far probably would do no good. Increasing gun free school zones and punishment for violating those zones will not stop a mass shooter.

Nonetheless, the policy makers want to focus on mass shooters and not every day shooters. They want to focus on rifles and not handguns. Rifles, interestingly enough, contribute to far fewer murders than knives, hands, feet, clubs, or hammers.

But the discussion will not move to handguns because handguns are pretty popular in this country. Many people own them — far more own them than own semi-automatic rifles. More so, handguns are used in vastly more crimes.

It is not, however, just handguns that must be discussed when discussing gun violence. This gets to why we cannot have a meaningful conversation in this country and never will. To do so will get you branded a racist.

“Blacks were disproportionately represented as both homicide victims and offenders. The victimization rate for blacks (27.8 per 100,000) was 6 times higher than the rate for whites (4.5 per 100,000). The offending rate for blacks (34.4 per 100,000) was almost 8 times higher than the rate for whites (4.5 per 100,000).”

“Males represented 77% of homicide victims and nearly 90% of offenders. The victimization rate for males (11.6 per 100,000) was 3 times higher than the rate for females (3.4 per 100,000). The offending rate for males (15.1 per 100,000) was almost 9 times higher than the rate for females (1.7 per 100,000).”

“Approximately a third (34%) of murder victims and almost half (49%) of the offenders were under age 25. For both victims and offenders, the rate per 100,000 peaked in the 18 to 24 year-old age group at 17.1 victims per 100,000 and 29.3 offenders per 100,000.”

These are all direct quotes from a United States Department of Justice report released by the Obama Administration in November of 2011.
...
Gun violence in the United States is, over all, on a steady decline, something the chattering class and policy makers tend to ignore. Again, from the Department of Justice:
...
These are terrible statistics. In our urban areas — and gun violence happens much more in urban areas than anywhere else — young black men, often in broken families, are joining gangs and committing acts of violence against each other. There have been 24 people murdered with guns in Chicago since the Newtown tragedy (see here and here). Just look at the most violent neighborhood in Chicago with 202 murders since 2007. Look at the ages.

Banning guns tomorrow will not stop this. Focusing on handguns instead of rifles or with rifles will not stop this. A renewed assault weapons ban will not stop this. Until we figure out how to fix the family instability and educational problems within the inner-city (because the problem is ultimately about poverty more than anything else), any solution proposed in Washington will be a Potemkin village solution masking the real gun conversation we should be having.

But, because the issue is tinged with race and often viewed as lacking a solution, policy makers and the media often don’t want to make eye contact with the problem. Instead, they’ll be consumed by the headline tragedy urge to “just do something”.

[Son of Gadsden]

So which gun specifically is going to protect me when the government decides to use drones to bomb the **** out of Northern California?

If the government did that, 300 million people would revolt. Other nations would be involved. That's another one of those ridiculous, strawman arguments for shock value. It holds no real validity.

But even if it did, it requires a spineless individual to sit down and do nothing because the odds seem to not be in their favor. Suppose the founders decided "England has the greatest Navy in the world...we have no chance. We should just lay down and take it." Our country was founded by much more brave, determined men than that. Logically speaking, were your argument the case, the "War on Terror" would have ended 10 years ago. The IRA would have been crushed in days.

[Wrong Direction]

I think he was kidding.

[The Evil Genius]

I think he was kidding.

My point (kind of) was that should the government decide to unleash its full might against the citizens of a specific area, they're ****ed.

Armed or not.

Of course, I don't buy into the notion that the government is out to get us.

[Son of Gadsden]

And my point was, I respectfully disagree.

And I listened in history class, that was also a point.

[The Evil Genius]

And my point was, I respectfully disagree.

And I listened in history class, that was also a point.

Well, if were going that route..then I have a BS in Political Science and a Masters in Public Administration plus 14+ years of public service that trumps what you may or may not have learned in history class.



---------- Post added January-11th-2013 at 01:41 PM ----------

And no, I'm not wishing to engage in a pissing contest.

Merely showing that some of us might have a larger breadth of knowledge, too.

[Son of Gadsden]

Well, if were going that route..then I have a BS in Political Science and a Masters in Public Administration plus 14+ years of public service that trumps what you may or may not have learned in history class.



---------- Post added January-11th-2013 at 01:41 PM ----------

And no, I'm not wishing to engage in a pissing contest.

Merely showing that some of us might have a larger breadth of knowledge, too.

And to think, all these countries with dictators and oppressive regimes...if only someone would have majored in Political Science....

But hey, don't mind me. All I did was read the Constitution...a document written by individuals paranoid that the government was out to get them.

You would think they just fought a war about it or something.

[MattFancy]

Well if you're gonna start loading up on guns for the gov't take over, I better get some ready for the alien invasion

[Son of Gadsden]

Well if you're gonna start loading up on guns for the gov't take over, I better get some ready for the alien invasion

Now comes the part where there are no real hard facts that can't be debunked to make me look like a fool, so you just end the argument with something foolish. Seen it before, want no part of it. The intelligent discussion is over. Peace.

[Predicto]

And to think, all these countries with dictators and oppressive regimes...if only someone would have majored in Political Science....

But hey, don't mind me. All I did was read the Constitution...a document written by individuals paranoid that the government was out to get them.

You would think they just fought a war about it or something.

Dude, save the molon labe stuff for another board.

Anyone who claims simple answers in Constitutional interpretation or provides cut and dried historical "analysis" like you are presenting here is going to meet some resistance from those of us who know what we are talking about.

[ZoEd]

Congratulations on finding one state senator who wants to ban all semi-automatic weapons. I wonder how long that took.

The funniest thing about your post is your claim that can't reason with us using common sense while at the same time you completely make up your own set of facts and create a world that doesn't exist. Who says everyone with a gun is a gun nut? You talk about this big fear of all guns being banned and no one is suggesting that and you can't find a single politician suggesting that.

I
Read again, because people have actually said exactly that. And, simply read a few posts about this one "Wouldn't you say that most people who own an AK do so because they think it's cool".

Actually, the link I provided was a simple google search and it was one of the first that popped up. No digging, simply "politician that wants to ban ALL guns". But why bother, of course you're right, because if you say something loud and often enough and a handful of people agree, it obviously means you're right.

---------- Post added January-11th-2013 at 06:30 PM ----------

http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles/silveira58.html

Of course since the site is called backwoodshome it will blown off and most won't even read it, especially since it doesn't support their agenda.

[zoony]

Dude, save the molon labe stuff for another board.

Anyone who claims simple answers in Constitutional interpretation or provides cut and dried historical "analysis" like you are presenting here is going to meet some resistance from those of us who know what we are talking about.

See, you've already been painted as an out of touch academic elite. So, your opinion is void. That was step 1 of selling ignorance.

The real answers lie with the guy who reads blogs at work. Michigan Lawyers are idiots.

[Corcaigh]

See, you've already been painted as an out of touch academic elite. So, your opinion is void. That was step 1 of selling ignorance.

The real answers lie with the guy who reads blogs at work. Michigan Lawyers are idiots.

The Founding Fathers never studied the Constitution in college.

[ZoEd]

http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles/silveira58.html

Long, but good read. Take it for what it's worth!

Anybody bother Reading this? Just wondering what the take is on this article. I think it makes some pretty good arguments, wonder why no one has challenged them.