Since: Nov 10

Whitney, TX

#23 Jan 6, 2013
Your News - Your Way wrote:
We have a ‘gun problem’ because we have a leadership problem – or rather, a lack of leadership problem.
The National Institute of Mental Health alone has over 3,000 individual studies that prove television and movie violence promotes criminally violent behavior in many children.
LOG ON TO www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed (WHICH IS THE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE) AND TYPE IN KEY WORDS “effects of television viewing” AND YOU WILL SEE FIRST HAND THE ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF RESEARCH INFORMATION AVAILABLE....... SO, DON’T LET ANY SPOKESMAN FOR THE TELEVISION AND MOVIE INDUSTRY TRY TO TELL YOU OTHER COUNTRIES DON’T HAVE THIS PROBLEM.... IT IS WORLDWIDE.
Violence is central to the media's attention. Unless things get smashed, nobody pays attention.
Somehow TV & Hollywood movie executives are exempt from having the finger pointed at them and they hide behind the first amendment. They say if you don't like what children watches, just turn it off. Well, you can say the same thing about guns. Just put them down.
Same with tobacco. Alcohol kills more than 10 times the amount of people that tobacco does, yet guess who gets the big guns pointed at them???
Want some more facts?
By the time children reach the age of 16, they will have witnessed 33,000 murders and over 200,000 acts of violence on network TV. You think that accurately "just reflects real life?"
Then you are an idiot.
A 10-year study at the University of Illinois found that television is more crucial to a child’s behavior than even their family or their social class.
GUN HISTORY
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981; 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979; 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
After ONLY 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australian taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:
* Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
* Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.
* Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
* While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.
* There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
They want our guns?? MOLON LABE !!!
Molon Labe

Texarkana, TX

#24 Jan 9, 2013
Tom Horn wrote:
<quoted text>They want our guns?? MOLON LABE !!!
No one wants to take your stupid guns away, you drama queen, and you know it! This gun control debate is about keeping assault rifles out of the hands of lunatics who want to go to schools, movie theaters, churches and malls and shoot as many people as they can as quickly as they can. You know this yet you want to pretend that someone is out to get your guns. Get this through your thick skull; NO ONE WANTS YOUR DAMN GUNS!!!!!! People in this country just want to go places without being shot. You are in the minority if you think otherwise.

Since: Nov 10

Lititz, PA

#25 Jan 10, 2013
Molon Labe wrote:
<quoted text>
No one wants to take your stupid guns away, you drama queen, and you know it! This gun control debate is about keeping assault rifles out of the hands of lunatics who want to go to schools, movie theaters, churches and malls and shoot as many people as they can as quickly as they can. You know this yet you want to pretend that someone is out to get your guns. Get this through your thick skull; NO ONE WANTS YOUR DAMN GUNS!!!!!! People in this country just want to go places without being shot. You are in the minority if you think otherwise.
Oh really?

“We should ban those in Iowa,” he said, adding that such a ban should be applied retroactively.

“We need to get them off the streets — illegally — and even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them,” Muhlbauer told the Daily Times Herald.“We can’t have those out there. Because if they’re out there they’re just going to get circulated around to the wrong people. Those guns should not be in the public’s hands. There are just too many guns.”

The newspaper published excerpts from the interview Wednesday morning along with an audio recording of the full 15-minute interview.

Since: Nov 10

Lititz, PA

#26 Jan 10, 2013
Molon Labe wrote:
<quoted text>
No one wants to take your stupid guns away, you drama queen, and you know it! This gun control debate is about keeping assault rifles out of the hands of lunatics who want to go to schools, movie theaters, churches and malls and shoot as many people as they can as quickly as they can. You know this yet you want to pretend that someone is out to get your guns. Get this through your thick skull; NO ONE WANTS YOUR DAMN GUNS!!!!!! People in this country just want to go places without being shot. You are in the minority if you think otherwise.
Oh really ?

In the interview, Mr. Cuomo did not offer specifics about the measures he might propose, but, while discussing assault weapons, he said:“Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.”

Since: Nov 10

Lititz, PA

#27 Jan 10, 2013
One more thing: "assault weapons" are NOT available to the civilian population; only the military and law enforcement. "Assault weapons" have a feature that is not available on civilian weapons called "select fire" which allows the operator to select either semi-automatic mode, 3-shot burst or full auto. The media and the gun grabbers LOVE the phrase since it sounds so sinister. Our semi-automatic rifles and shotguns would be so over matched by full auto fire it would be like taking a knife to a gun fight.
Giggles

Texarkana, AR

#28 Jan 10, 2013
This discussion is the epitome of retard. Topix is really the way to go to protect your gun rights! Keep up the good work.

In case you guys don't know how it works - President Barack Obama does not write laws. He can feel free to suggest them to a majority NRA loving house. This will go nowhere, as it always does. In the mean time the majority of people will preach the 2nd amendment, quote the living and dead, and decry statements by the people who aren't "on their side".

OMG JOLTIN JOE BIDENZ IS GUNNA TAKE MAH HOG RIFLE WITH THE 60-ROUND CLIP AND EXPLODING TIP AMMO!'MURICA IS GOING DOWN THE TUBES! I'M MOVING TO CANADA!
Molon Labe

Texarkana, TX

#29 Jan 10, 2013
Tom Horn wrote:
One more thing: "assault weapons" are NOT available to the civilian population; only the military and law enforcement. "Assault weapons" have a feature that is not available on civilian weapons called "select fire" which allows the operator to select either semi-automatic mode, 3-shot burst or full auto. The media and the gun grabbers LOVE the phrase since it sounds so sinister. Our semi-automatic rifles and shotguns would be so over matched by full auto fire it would be like taking a knife to a gun fight.
Let me ask you a couple of questions and I'm being as serious as I know how to be. Did you condone the killings at Columbine, Aurora, Portland, Tucson, Newtown and all the other places that assault weapons were used to kill innocent people? Are Jared Loughner, James Holmes, and Adam Lanza people that you look up to and admire? If the answers are yes, you are one pathetic human being. If the answers are no, how would you suggest we prevent lunatics in the future from getting their hands on weapons that are manufactured for one reason only and that is to murder as many people as possible as quickly as possible?
deep thoughts

Ephrata, PA

#30 Jan 10, 2013
gang members have had dangerous weapons for some time now in the big cities. its only when white uper income suburbia becomes a statistic that people suddenly care. only when gop wasp becomes just another victim that we have to do something. what about all the minorities and poor whites in inner cities that have had to learn to live with crime as a reality for generations. shouldnt that be dealt with first or at least as important as this issue.

Since: Jul 10

Texarkana, TX

#31 Jan 10, 2013
Molon Labe wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me ask you a couple of questions and I'm being as serious as I know how to be. Did you condone the killings at Columbine, Aurora, Portland, Tucson, Newtown and all the other places that assault weapons were used to kill innocent people? Are Jared Loughner, James Holmes, and Adam Lanza people that you look up to and admire? If the answers are yes, you are one pathetic human being. If the answers are no, how would you suggest we prevent lunatics in the future from getting their hands on weapons that are manufactured for one reason only and that is to murder as many people as possible as quickly as possible?
Your assumption that these guns are manufactured for one reason being to murder as many people as possible is simply stupid.

They are manufactured for the same purpose as any firearm, which is to expell a projectile, ie bullet, out the end of the barrel at the point of aim as indicated by the sight picture.

The fact that the firearm is able to hold 1, 10, 20, or 30 rounds of ammo does not change its intended purpose. BTW, Loughner used a 9mm handgun, not the dreaded "assault" weapon as so many people incorrectly call them.

The guns didn't kill anyone. The people holding the guns and shooting others did. To blame the gun would be like blaming automobiles for killing 30+ thousand people each year. Neither one can, without someone doing something illegal or stupid cause any harm to people.

Explain to me why the UK rate of violent crime is 2,000 per 100,000 people while the US with all our guns, is 466 per 100,000 for the 2007 year. It seems based on those numbers that guns actually deter violent crime as opposed to creating it.

Yes, criminals take guns and do bad things, that is a given. However if laws are passed banning a particular type of gun, or all guns for that matter, only honest people will be affected by the laws. Afterall, criminals are criminals, and they don't follow the laws, regardless of what they are. The current laws against murder haven't stopped these tragedies, nor will laws that say you can't commit murder with a certain type of firearm.

There is no way to stop people from killing each other. It goes back to Cain and Able. The mental health issues in this country need to be address before any sweeping laws against objects should be looked at.

Making more gun free zones where crazy people know there will be nothing to stop their terror, certainly isn't the answer. If you look at all the shootings you posted. As soon as there was resistance, the shooting either was stopped or the shooter committed suicide. Explain to us how lessening the threat to the bad guy will make things better.
Molon Labe

Texarkana, TX

#32 Jan 10, 2013
farronwolf wrote:
<quoted text>Your assumption that these guns are manufactured for one reason being to murder as many people as possible is simply stupid.

They are manufactured for the same purpose as any firearm, which is to expell a projectile, ie bullet, out the end of the barrel at the point of aim as indicated by the sight picture.

The fact that the firearm is able to hold 1, 10, 20, or 30 rounds of ammo does not change its intended purpose. BTW, Loughner used a 9mm handgun, not the dreaded "assault" weapon as so many people incorrectly call them.

The guns didn't kill anyone. The people holding the guns and shooting others did. To blame the gun would be like blaming automobiles for killing 30+ thousand people each year. Neither one can, without someone doing something illegal or stupid cause any harm to people.

Explain to me why the UK rate of violent crime is 2,000 per 100,000 people while the US with all our guns, is 466 per 100,000 for the 2007 year. It seems based on those numbers that guns actually deter violent crime as opposed to creating it.

Yes, criminals take guns and do bad things, that is a given. However if laws are passed banning a particular type of gun, or all guns for that matter, only honest people will be affected by the laws. Afterall, criminals are criminals, and they don't follow the laws, regardless of what they are. The current laws against murder haven't stopped these tragedies, nor will laws that say you can't commit murder with a certain type of firearm.

There is no way to stop people from killing each other. It goes back to Cain and Able. The mental health issues in this country need to be address before any sweeping laws against objects should be looked at.

Making more gun free zones where crazy people know there will be nothing to stop their terror, certainly isn't the answer. If you look at all the shootings you posted. As soon as there was resistance, the shooting either was stopped or the shooter committed suicide. Explain to us how lessening the threat to the bad guy will make things better.
Ok, genius. You have stuck your nose into a conversation that is none of your business. Over the years, I have read hundreds of your posts on Topix and there were times that I didn't agree with every word but I didn't come on and call you stupid. That's schoolyard and juvenile so I've already proven I'm a bigger person than you are without even trying. Let me ask you, what is it about these assault weapons that causes you gun nuts to have orgasms when you see or hear about one being used to kill people with. I don't get it. I don't want guns banned. I have a gun myself that I will use to defend myself, my family, and my property if need be. I don't need a military-styled weapon like you apparently do. One more question. When you hear about shootings like the ones at Aurora and Newtown, do you feel sadness or indifference or what? I'm trying to understand the minds of people like you and your ilk.

Since: Jul 10

Texarkana, TX

#33 Jan 10, 2013
This is an open forum, so if you are posting on it, don't get offended if someone chimes in that you didn't ask to. Maybe you want to limit the 1A as well as the 2A.

First of all, I don't own any AR's, I don't like the platform or the most common caliber they are built in. I carried an M-16 when I was in the Army, and that was enough for me. If I liked the platform, I would probably own one. But your assumption that I already do is dead wrong.

Secondly, you are making some additional stupid statements, when you think that "gun nuts" get excited when innocent people are killed, regardless of what kind of tool is used. I am certain that you can find no evidence of people being anything but saddened by the loss of innocent lives. If you can find where people are rejoicing or having orgasms because of it, I will stop calling your statements stupid. You won't.

To think that because someone prefers a different kind of gun than you do, they are ilk, again is stupid. I think Suburbans should be illegal because if they hit you, you are more likely to be injured or killed due to their mass over a econo box someone else may be driving. Sounds like a pretty stupid argument doesn't it. Substitute, "assault rifle" for Suburban, it is the same stupid argument.

I suggest that you do a bit of research as it pertains to the 2A. A well regulated militia, and by the way there is still a militia defined by the US statutes, constitutes every able bodied male between the ages of 17 and 45, and women who are in the guard or reserves.

Well regulated means modern functioning firearms. When the 2A was written, yes they were muskets, but that was the modern firearm of the day. As technology progressed, so did modern firearms. Today, well regulated means the same thing, modern firearms, which happen to be those same firearms which you find so offensive. If people are called to defend the State, they aren't going to do it with pitchforks and muzzle loaders. They are going to do it with modern, effective firearms.

Do you suggest that the 1A be limited to the technology when it was written. Quill pens and movable type presses would be in order. We would need to limit free speech to that, and do away with radio, tv, internet, large scale printing presses, and the constant bombardment that is taking place under the 1A.
Giggles

Texarkana, AR

#34 Jan 10, 2013
While we're at it let's compare apples to apples. Using a violent crime as a measuring statistic is assuming that every crime takes place with a firearm. How about actual murder, which is what we worry about happening at the hands of a crazy person with a gun. A murder is the worst-case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countrie...

Firearm Murders
USA: 3.7 / 100,000
UK:.04 / 100,000
Australia:.07 / 100,000
Canada:.5 / 100,000

Total (Murders, Suicide, Accidents, Undetermined) firearm-related deaths
USA: 10.2 / 100,000
UK:.25 / 100,000
Australia: 1.05 / 100,000
Canada: 2.13 / 100,000

These statistics are the most recently available from several sources. We're comparably constructed societies, with small differences. Firearms are legal, but restricted in Canada and Australia.

How would more guns, more bullets make our number go down?
Giggles

Texarkana, AR

#35 Jan 10, 2013
farronwolf wrote:
This is an open forum, so if you are posting on it, don't get offended if someone chimes in that you didn't ask to. Maybe you want to limit the 1A as well as the 2A.
First of all, I don't own any AR's, I don't like the platform or the most common caliber they are built in. I carried an M-16 when I was in the Army, and that was enough for me. If I liked the platform, I would probably own one. But your assumption that I already do is dead wrong.
Secondly, you are making some additional stupid statements, when you think that "gun nuts" get excited when innocent people are killed, regardless of what kind of tool is used. I am certain that you can find no evidence of people being anything but saddened by the loss of innocent lives. If you can find where people are rejoicing or having orgasms because of it, I will stop calling your statements stupid. You won't.
To think that because someone prefers a different kind of gun than you do, they are ilk, again is stupid. I think Suburbans should be illegal because if they hit you, you are more likely to be injured or killed due to their mass over a econo box someone else may be driving. Sounds like a pretty stupid argument doesn't it. Substitute, "assault rifle" for Suburban, it is the same stupid argument.
I suggest that you do a bit of research as it pertains to the 2A. A well regulated militia, and by the way there is still a militia defined by the US statutes, constitutes every able bodied male between the ages of 17 and 45, and women who are in the guard or reserves.
Well regulated means modern functioning firearms...
The founding fathers did not have a crystal ball, nor were they infallible. Therefore there will not be a solution. People's children will continue dying to shit like this until:

A.) The country is no longer a country
B.) We're so technologically advanced that bullets are no longer life-threatening. By then the 2nd amendment, as it reads, will also apply to force-field penetrating laser guns.
C.) There is a constitutional amendment to clarify and modernize the 2nd amendment.

I stand by my earlier assertions...this is a retarded discussion to have on Topix, or pretty much anywhere else, because there is no solution. At least, there's not one that's achievable in any way at this time. And before you go with the NRA's suggestion of armed officers or volunteers at schools, Columbine had 2.
deep thoughts

Lewisburg, PA

#36 Jan 10, 2013
people are not allowed to own bazookas
or tanks or surface to air missles
and we do not seem to have a problem with the limitation of those mass murder capable weapons.

please enlighten the masses on a least three legitimate needs for a fully automatic weapon owned by John Doe the average non-military career or background individual
farronwolf

Texarkana, TX

#37 Jan 10, 2013
deep thoughts wrote:
people are not allowed to own bazookas
or tanks or surface to air missles
and we do not seem to have a problem with the limitation of those mass murder capable weapons.
please enlighten the masses on a least three legitimate needs for a fully automatic weapon owned by John Doe the average non-military career or background individual
You can't go to the local gun shop and simply purchase a fully automatic firearm. Certainly you know that, well maybe you don't, but you can't.

In order to own a full auto firearm you must first apply and recieve a tax stamp to purchase the firearm in the first place. Extensive background checks are done while you wait several months for the stamp to be approved. The same goes for silencers or suppressors as they are correctly called. Full auto firearms are well outside the price range of most individuals. A quick search reveals that a full auto M4 will run you in excess of 11k.

Much to some peoples dismay. These "assault rifles" are not full auto, they are semi auto the same as millions other rifles, shotguns, and pistols that are in many homes in this country.

Tanks, bazookas, and surface to air missles are not part of what is refered to in "well regulated militia". They are not what one would bring from their home if the State needed to be defended.
deep thoughts

Lewisburg, PA

#38 Jan 10, 2013
we have an army though, that is the militia. there is little to no need for John Doe to have his own personal arsonal in case the call is made.

red dawn was a good movie, but it was a movie. the russians are nto really going to invade the continental usa. that was a fictional scenerio made for a movie.
farronwolf

Texarkana, TX

#39 Jan 10, 2013
You are completely wrong about the Army being the militia.

I posted what the militia consists of earlier, but since folks can't or don't read, I am going to post the actual staute.

10 USC § 311

(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1)the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2)the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

10 USC § 312

a)The following persons are exempt from militia duty:
(1)The Vice President.

(2)The judicial and executive officers of the United States, the several States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

(3)Members of the armed forces, except members who are not on active duty.

(4)Customhouse clerks.

(5)Persons employed by the United States in the transmission of mail.

(6)Workmen employed in armories, arsenals, and naval shipyards of the United States.

(7)Pilots on navigable waters.

(8)Mariners in the sea service of a citizen of, or a merchant in, the United States.

(b)A person who claims exemption because of religious belief is exempt from militia duty in a combatant capacity, if the conscientious holding of that belief is established under such regulations as the President may prescribe. However, such a person is not exempt from militia duty that the President determines to be noncombatant.

The active military is not the militia.

Since: Nov 10

Grandview, TX

#40 Jan 11, 2013
farronwolf wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't go to the local gun shop and simply purchase a fully automatic firearm. Certainly you know that, well maybe you don't, but you can't.
In order to own a full auto firearm you must first apply and recieve a tax stamp to purchase the firearm in the first place. Extensive background checks are done while you wait several months for the stamp to be approved. The same goes for silencers or suppressors as they are correctly called. Full auto firearms are well outside the price range of most individuals. A quick search reveals that a full auto M4 will run you in excess of 11k.
Much to some peoples dismay. These "assault rifles" are not full auto, they are semi auto the same as millions other rifles, shotguns, and pistols that are in many homes in this country.
Tanks, bazookas, and surface to air missles are not part of what is refered to in "well regulated militia". They are not what one would bring from their home if the State needed to be defended.
Well said!!

In 1986, the United States government banned the future importation and domestic manufacture of machine guns for civilian consumption, and the already limited inventory of Class 3 weapons has since diminished substantially. At a rate now more accelerated than ever, these weapons are ending up in the hands of collectors who have no intention of ever selling them. The effect is twofold: Class 3 arms are growing increasingly scarce, and their prices are rising accordingly. Further Federal bans in 1989 and 1994 relating to semiautomatic clones of military weapons have spurred similar trends in that arena as well. Thus, the price of a quality, collector-grade Class 3 or semiautomatic weapon has spiraled beyond the comprehension of the average buyer
deep thoughts

Texarkana, TX

#41 Jan 11, 2013
me thinks you gun enthusiasts have watched one too many television episodes of Doomsday Preppers and ABC's Last Resort, and one too many movies like Red Dawn and The Postman.

Since: Jul 10

Texarkana, TX

#42 Jan 11, 2013
Whether you think folks have watched too much tv has no bearing on what the 2A means.

I have a realistic scenario for you though. Imagine the US and world getting thrown into a depression the likes of which occured during the early part of the 20th century.

Imagine how people today would react when they didn't get their check from the federal gov. every month, their free housing was cut off, their food stamps were cut off, others loosing jobs and not being able to afford to stay in their home, keep their cars, or be able to feed their wives and children.

In the 20's, people lived in shanty towns and along the side of roadways. But they weren't used to having all the stuff that folks have today. They had neccessities for the most part and they had to work for what they wanted before and after the depression. I have serious doubts as to whether people today would be willing to put up with those hardships. I honestly believe they would simply go looking to take it from those who had it, at whatever cost.

That is the real scenario we face as a country in the future. And that will certainly require people to defend themselves from those who will be willing to take what isn't theirs.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Texarkana Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why Do Black Peeps Look Like Apes? (Jan '12) 9 min Willie Granville 233
News Area activists push to make Dream Act a reality... 5 hr josh 8
Gypsies in Texarkana (Aug '10) Wed Robby113 832
Gypsy blacktoppers (Jun '13) Wed Milie 22
Boswell Gypsies Tue JillsLover 1
News Texarkana, TX police suspend search for missing... Oct 17 Dea Tea 2
teri giles probation officer (May '12) Oct 16 Dea Tea 58

Texarkana Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Texarkana Mortgages