Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post Reply
Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Coito ergo sum » Tue Jan 11, 2011 7:45 pm

Crumple wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
Crumple wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
Crumple wrote:The second lesson is to use engineering skills to build things not blow them up.

:fp:
Nobody is stopping you blokes. Build away! You waiting for permission?
I think everyone is waiting for the destructive troubled young nation to go sit in the corner and suck its thumb. :dance:
You ought have no trouble handling things without waiting on us. Have at it! Send your best builders out and save the world!

Oh, that's right - by "waiting" you mean waiting for us to get out our checkbooks and foot the bill ...again....
That's not a check book....it's a inkjet printer. :funny:
LOL - yes, the current administration's negotiating style consists of the phrase "how much do you want?" :hilarious:

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74078
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by JimC » Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:20 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
JimC wrote:
I agree. Surely there must be a way to reduce the weapon supply to the crazies ready to go postal. Otherwise, Americans will continue to pay a high price for their right to carry concealeable handguns (that being the relevent factor, not sporting rifles...)
Generally, you need a permit to carry concealed weapons. Since this fella bought his gun legally, there's not much that could be done about it. I mean - I suppose you could administer a psych test to everyone getting a gun, but given the lack of accuracy on those tests, I would imagine that they would be quite a blunt instrument. Alternatively, you could ban all guns smaller than a rifle. But, then again, Kennedy was shot with rifle....so, why allow rifles either/ Just ban them all.
One of your standard arguments against government control of anything is the "why stop there" approach, inviting the reader to think of government controls as an inevitable slide down a slippery slope. It is an emotive argument which adds little to the debate. It is perfectly possible to develop rational government controls which compromise between interest groups, but do not go further than is reasonable. Tighter controls on handgun ownership can be achieved without affecting ownership of sporting rifles; exactly how tight, and how owners are vetted needs careful thought. Sure, you will still get some rifle crime, but you could still get a real decrease in crime where the easy concealeability of handguns is the key.
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
maiforpeace
Account Suspended at Member's Request
Posts: 15726
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:41 am
Location: under the redwood trees

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by maiforpeace » Tue Jan 11, 2011 10:38 pm

Here we go... this makes me feel so much safer! Whoopee!

Glock Pistol Sales Surge in Aftermath of Arizona Shootings
After a Glock-wielding gunman killed six people at a Tucson shopping center on Jan. 8, Greg Wolff, the owner of two Arizona gun shops, told his manager to get ready for a stampede of new customers.

Wolff was right. Instead of hurting sales, the massacre had the $499 semi-automatic pistols -- popular with police, sport shooters and gangsters -- flying out the doors of his Glockmeister stores in Mesa and Phoenix.

“We’re at double our volume over what we usually do,” Wolff said two days after the shooting spree that also left 14 wounded, including Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who remains in critical condition.

A national debate over weaknesses in state and federal gun laws stirred by the shooting has stoked fears among gun buyers that stiffer restrictions may be coming from Congress, gun dealers say. The result is that a deadly demonstration of the weapon’s effectiveness has also fired up sales of handguns in Arizona and other states, according to federal law enforcement data.

“When something like this happens people get worried that the government is going to ban stuff,” Wolff said.

Arizona gun dealers say that among the biggest sellers over the past two days is the Glock 19 made by privately held Glock GmbH, based in Deutsch-Wagram, Austria, the model used in the shooting.

Sales Jump

One-day sales of handguns in Arizona jumped 60 percent on Jan. 10 compared with the corresponding Monday a year ago, the second-biggest increase of any state in the country, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation data. From a year earlier, handgun sales ticked up yesterday 65 percent in Ohio, 16 percent in California, 38 percent in Illinois and 33 percent in New York, the FBI data show, and increased nationally about 5 percent.

Federally tracked gun sales, which are drawn from sales in gun stores that require a federal background check, also jumped following the 2007 massacre at Virginia Tech, in which 32 people were killed.

“Whenever there is a huge event, especially when it’s close to home, people do tend to run out and buy something to protect their family,” said Don Gallardo, a manager at Arizona Shooter’s World in Phoenix, who said that the number of people signing up for the store’s concealed weapons class doubled over the weekend. Gallardo said he expects handgun sales to climb steadily throughout the week.

Permissive Laws

Jared Loughner, the 22-year-old accused in the shooting, has a petty criminal record, yet so far there’s no evidence that his background contained anything that would have prevented him from buying a handgun in Arizona, where limits on owning and carrying a gun are among the most permissive in the country, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a gun- control advocacy group.

Critics have focused on the extended magazine used in the shooting. It was illegal until 2004 under the expired federal ban on assault weapons. The clip -- still banned in some states and popular in Arizona, gun dealers say -- allegedly allowed Loughner to fire 33 rounds without reloading.

Democratic Representative Carolyn McCarthy of New York said this week that she plans to introduce legislation that would ban the high-capacity magazine. McCarthy’s husband was one of six people shot to death in 1993 by a lone gunman on a Long Island railroad train. Her son was among the 19 people wounded.

“The fact that the guy had a magazine that could carry 33 rounds, he was not out to just kill. He was there to do a mass killing,” said Dr. Lawrence Kobilinsky, a forensics expert at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.

Virginia Tech

Light and easy to use, a Glock 9 mm was also wielded by the Virginia Tech killer, Seung-Hui Cho, in a spree that left 32 people dead. The gun is among the most popular sidearms for U.S. police departments. A negative for law enforcement is that the rifling of the barrel makes it almost impossible to match a bullet to an individual weapon with ballistic tests, Kobilinsky said.

“It’s one of the greatest guns made in the history of the world,” said Wolff, whose two stores sell Glock-made weapons almost exclusively.

When Loughner allegedly walked into Tucson’s Sportsman’s Warehouse last November to buy a Glock 19 -- favored as a concealed weapon because it is slightly smaller and lighter than similar caliber handguns -- federal law would have required a background check via the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, a telephone-based check administered by the FBI.

Background Check

Loughner would have had to present his driver’s license and answer several questions, including queries on past drug use, domestic violence or felony convictions. Wolff said in most cases the check takes less than five minutes and the number of denials he receives is a tiny fraction of the total.

Wolff called the shooting “horrible.” Nonetheless, it has created a surge of publicity for the gun, he said.

“It’s in the news now. I’m sure the Green Bay Packers are selling all kinds of jerseys today as well,” he said. “I just think our state embraces guns.”

Arizona law allows anyone to carry a gun in public if it’s in full view, making it what’s known as an open-carry state. Until recently, gun store owners say, it was common to see people carrying weapons in grocery stores or coffee shops. That’s less true today, because last year that state passed a law allowing individuals to carry a concealed weapon without a permit.

Gun Law Rating

Daniel Vise, senior attorney with the Brady Campaign, said Arizona received a score of two out of 100 on the organization’s rating of state gun laws, and that the rate of gun deaths in the state is one and a half times the national average.

Brady Campaign spokeswoman Caroline Brewer said that some states require local law enforcement agencies to approve gun permits, a system that would have given authorities a chance to further assess Loughner, whose behavior acquaintances have described as erratic. Loughner tried to buy ammunition the morning of the shooting at a local Wal-Mart Stores Inc. outlet, then left during the sale process, according to a statement by the company.

“If a clerk at Wal-Mart picked something up and refused to sell this guy some ammunition, we can certainly imagine that law enforcement would have picked that up as well,” Brewer said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Michael Riley in Washington at michaelriley@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: David E. Rovella at drovella@bloomberg.net.
Atheists have always argued that this world is all that we have, and that our duty is to one another to make the very most and best of it. ~Christopher Hitchens~
Image
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3534/379 ... 3be9_o.jpg[/imgc]

User avatar
Julia
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 10:13 pm
About me: Refugee from RDF
Location: suburb of DC, Maryland, USA
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Julia » Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:21 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote: Why are those the only options? Maybe it was his left wing views that motivated him?
Okay, I've seen you run with this "left-wing" stuff one too many times now. I would like to point out that exactly ONE high school classmate said that about him 5 years ago (in 2006). He was registered Independent. I know that quote from that one classmate has been making the rounds on the conservative media because the only right-wing Xtian type on my Facebook brought it up first thing :hilarious:

Granted that it looks like this person was psychotic--do you think it just coincidence that this happened in Arizona, which recently had a very contentious, close congressional race and Giffords' race was one of the most vitriolic with violent rhetoric by her opponent, Jesse Kelly?
Why is it assumed that this is the "gun nut crazies?" Giffords herself owned guns and was very strongly pro Second Amendment. If she hadn't been shot, she'd be one of the people you're calling gun nut crazies?
Also, despite Giffords' being pro-gun rights, the NRA gives her a grade of D+, presumably because she is in favor of reasonable restrictions on said rights.

User avatar
maiforpeace
Account Suspended at Member's Request
Posts: 15726
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:41 am
Location: under the redwood trees

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by maiforpeace » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:28 am

I couldn't resist posting this, it's too perfect. :lol:

Image
Atheists have always argued that this world is all that we have, and that our duty is to one another to make the very most and best of it. ~Christopher Hitchens~
Image
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3534/379 ... 3be9_o.jpg[/imgc]

User avatar
Mishakal
Forum babysitter.
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:12 am
Location: A comfy bed
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Mishakal » Wed Jan 12, 2011 6:27 am

maiforpeace wrote:I couldn't resist posting this, it's too perfect. :lol:

Image
I can't tell them apart... ;)
Gawdzilla wrote:
AshtonBlack wrote:"Fuckin' civvies getting in the way of the bullets..."
Ordnance Absorption Devices.

User avatar
Atheist-Lite
Formerly known as Crumple
Posts: 8745
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 12:35 pm
About me: You need a jetpack? Here, take mine. I don't need a jetpack this far away.
Location: In the Galactic Hub, Yes That One !!!
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Atheist-Lite » Wed Jan 12, 2011 7:58 am

He's a powerful figure and can afford lawyers. A great thing he ain't a atheist and is going blind. ;this:
nxnxm,cm,m,fvmf,vndfnm,nm,f,dvm,v v vmfm,vvm,d,dd vv sm,mvd,fmf,fn ,v fvfm,

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Jan 12, 2011 1:08 pm

JimC wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
JimC wrote:
I agree. Surely there must be a way to reduce the weapon supply to the crazies ready to go postal. Otherwise, Americans will continue to pay a high price for their right to carry concealeable handguns (that being the relevent factor, not sporting rifles...)
Generally, you need a permit to carry concealed weapons. Since this fella bought his gun legally, there's not much that could be done about it. I mean - I suppose you could administer a psych test to everyone getting a gun, but given the lack of accuracy on those tests, I would imagine that they would be quite a blunt instrument. Alternatively, you could ban all guns smaller than a rifle. But, then again, Kennedy was shot with rifle....so, why allow rifles either/ Just ban them all.
One of your standard arguments against government control of anything is the "why stop there" approach, inviting the reader to think of government controls as an inevitable slide down a slippery slope. It is an emotive argument which adds little to the debate. It is perfectly possible to develop rational government controls which compromise between interest groups, but do not go further than is reasonable. Tighter controls on handgun ownership can be achieved without affecting ownership of sporting rifles; exactly how tight, and how owners are vetted needs careful thought. Sure, you will still get some rifle crime, but you could still get a real decrease in crime where the easy concealeability of handguns is the key.
I made no slippery slope argument. I'm not against gun regulation, anyway. So, what are you even talking about?

The facts are: in Arizona as in every state, you need a permit to carry concealed weapons. Also - fact - Jared monster bought the gun legally. He passed the background check. If there is an alternative here other than banning the 9 mm handgun that would keep it from him, I'd love to hear it. And, the point is very clear that a guy who is good with guns could still buy a rifle.

So what is the argument?

"Standard argument?" I don't make slippery slope arguments when it comes to commercial regulation. I make arguments from reason - a regulation needs to make sense in terms of having a reasonable goal (that is within the government's lawful power) and then the mechanism or means used by the government must be reasonably related to achieving its goal.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Jan 12, 2011 1:19 pm

Julia wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote: Why are those the only options? Maybe it was his left wing views that motivated him?
Okay, I've seen you run with this "left-wing" stuff one too many times now. I would like to point out that exactly ONE high school classmate said that about him 5 years ago (in 2006). He was registered Independent. I know that quote from that one classmate has been making the rounds on the conservative media because the only right-wing Xtian type on my Facebook brought it up first thing :hilarious:
She didn't say it 5 years ago. She said it about him just the other day, but clarified that she hadn't been friends with the kid since 2007 - not 5 years ago.

I don't blame you for keeping your mind open when only one person has been quoted in that regard. However, right now we have 1 who has been quoted saying he was left wing, and we have 0 who have been quoted saying he was right wing.
Julia wrote:
Granted that it looks like this person was psychotic--do you think it just coincidence that this happened in Arizona, which recently had a very contentious, close congressional race and Giffords' race was one of the most vitriolic with violent rhetoric by her opponent, Jesse Kelly?
Yes. Plainly - because we have had many vitriolic races with "violent rhetoric" all over the country - in many countries - for as long as politics has been around.
Julia wrote:
Why is it assumed that this is the "gun nut crazies?" Giffords herself owned guns and was very strongly pro Second Amendment. If she hadn't been shot, she'd be one of the people you're calling gun nut crazies?
Also, despite Giffords' being pro-gun rights, the NRA gives her a grade of D+, presumably because she is in favor of reasonable restrictions on said rights.
My point was that none of this says anything about Loughler's motivation. Face it - the "left wing blogs" lit up with the idea that they could pin this on a political view - paste it on conservatives and teabaggers. Now, I loathe the Tea Party and oppose most of their views. However, I'm no more going to pin a mass murder by a psychopath on a "vociferous rhetoric" than I will pin it on Loughler's propensity to play Grand Theft Auto video games and watch violent movies.

I haven't said that he did it because he was described as Left Wing - I've argued that the fact that he was described as left wing lends as much credence to the idea that he did this because he was a radical lefty than that he was a radical righty.

I even pointed out above where Democrats have used "gun target" maps in the past. People were more than willing to pin the killings on Palin and her "gun sight" map. Yet, nobody is leveling blame on the Democrats and their "gun target" map. I also gave other examples of martial metaphors made by democrats - Kerry referred to taking a gun to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and "killing two birds with one stone." (specific reference to assassinating the President) And, Obama talked about bringing a gun, if "they" bring a knife. Any thought or concern that these references might cause someone to go out and kill? Of course not -- why?

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Jan 12, 2011 1:30 pm

Thank you Jon Stewart:

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2011/01/ ... shootings/

"I wouldn't blame our political environment for the Tucson shootings any more than I would blame heavy metal music for Columbine."

"Boy would it be nice, to be able to draw a straight line of causation from this horror to something tangible because then we could convince ourselves that if we just stop 'this' the horrors will end."

:cheers:

Image

User avatar
Atheist-Lite
Formerly known as Crumple
Posts: 8745
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 12:35 pm
About me: You need a jetpack? Here, take mine. I don't need a jetpack this far away.
Location: In the Galactic Hub, Yes That One !!!
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Atheist-Lite » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:56 pm

Holywood feeds the fire with these kinds of frenzies. Close Holywood and the shooters wouldn't have rolemodels.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 122632.htm
nxnxm,cm,m,fvmf,vndfnm,nm,f,dvm,v v vmfm,vvm,d,dd vv sm,mvd,fmf,fn ,v fvfm,

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:23 pm

Image http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... TopStories
Since the news of Mr. Loughner's alleged role in the shootings broke, members in the public forums of Earth Empires expressed shock that one of their own would take such action, and worried that people would point fingers at the game or the community.
I'm surprised someone somewhere hasn't pointed the finger at gaming, yet. After all, we all know violent gaming causes people to commit violence, just like "uncivil rhetoric."
Last edited by Coito ergo sum on Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rob
Carpe Diem
Posts: 2558
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:49 am
About me: Just a man in love with science and the pursuit of knowledge.
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Rob » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:32 pm

Forget about the shooting and this kid for a second, CES. Do you hold the position that the right wing rhetoric and language is perfectly acceptable?
I can live with doubt, and uncertainty, and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. [...] I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is, as far as I can tell, possibly. It doesn’t frighten me. - Richard Feynman

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:47 pm

ScienceRob wrote:Forget about the shooting and this kid for a second, CES. Do you hold the position that the right wing rhetoric and language is perfectly acceptable?
If by "acceptable" you mean - that someone espousing right wing rhetoric has as much right as anyone else to use such rhetoric? Then yes. I do. Why wouldn't it be? Left wing rhetoric is acceptable. Centrist rhetoric is acceptable. Communist rhetoric. Absolutely. Why in the world wouldn't it be?

In some contexts, any kind of rhetoric can become "unacceptable" to a given person in a given set of circumstances. In the sense of common courtesy, polite company - manners - whatever. I might not find it acceptable for a fascist rhetoric to be discussed at a wedding, or something.

Maybe someone thinks left wing rhetoric is offensive by and large. Everyone is free to have that opinion, and many do. However, if by "acceptable" what you're asking is that persons espousing left wing rhetoric have an equal right to espouse that rhetoric as any other rhetoric ....well, then I think I have to say "of course, why not?"

User avatar
Rob
Carpe Diem
Posts: 2558
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:49 am
About me: Just a man in love with science and the pursuit of knowledge.
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Re: Gabrielle Giffords Shot

Post by Rob » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:49 pm

Very nice and neat, but I am talking about using the marks on the map by Sarah Palin and the rhetoric by Jesse. Is that acceptable?
I can live with doubt, and uncertainty, and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. [...] I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is, as far as I can tell, possibly. It doesn’t frighten me. - Richard Feynman

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Svartalf and 11 guests