Get ready for a real war.

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

Groups Copying N.R.A. Methods for the Election

The gun control movement has begun its most ambitious campaign to raise money, recruit foot soldiers and build public support for stronger gun laws in preparation for this fall's national elections.

http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/072400gun-control.html

-----

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), July 24, 2000

Answers

A "real war"?

No. In a real war, soldiers are killed and wounded. To be more exact, their bodies (or their corpses) are subjected to indignities far surpassing the hellish imagination of a Dante Alghieri or Heironymous Bosch. That includes real blood, real stench, and real horror.

Get real, cpr. This is just an election campaign you're talking about.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), July 24, 2000.


Now, now Brian, don't pick on cpr for careless use of the language. You know that the word "war" has been corrupted by 40 years of politically inspired misuse, ie the "war" on cancer; the "war" on drugs; the "war" on crime; the "war" on poverty, etc, etc.

cpr, just curious---do you favor more, less, or the same amount of gun control legislation?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), July 24, 2000.


I believe every WOMAN in this country with a clean record legally and mental health wise should be **GIVEN** a hand weapon.

I also believe that every cop should carry semi=automatics in the streets as a clear warning to criminals.

And I believe men who rape or beat up on women should be castrated by the women they pick on. Giving WOMEN a hand gun would greatly reduce the need for such "alterations".

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), July 24, 2000.


And I think Charleton Heston might make a fine Vice President for Geo. W. Bush.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), July 24, 2000.

"I believe every WOMAN in this country with a clean record legally and mental health wise should be **GIVEN** a hand weapon"

I disagree with you vehemenantly on this point. First off, how do you define "mental health"? Is it the suicidally depressed woman who's never sought treatment? Is it the recovering alcoholic who spent years in rehab and now needs a gun to defend herself from her abusive former spouse? And what if your religion precludes you from any sort of mental health services or examination?

Secondly, no one should carry a gun unless they are mentally and physically prepared to shoot it at another human being. Someone who pulls a gun on an attacker when they aren't prepared to pull the trigger puts themselves at tremendous risk for having that gun taken and used against them.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), July 24, 2000.



I figured that would be your POV and while you typically overstated yourself, I agree.

You might review the circumstances at Luby's cafeteria for the benefit of Tarzan-the-Apeshit-man.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), July 24, 2000.


DO TRY TO THINK of the obvious. If you can't **GIVE** a few WOMEN a hand gun (courtesy of the taxpayers)...I see no reason that private individuals should be hampered in the least. As I understand it, weapons can be bought in our as of now still Free Society. The few "Thelma and Louise" types would be a minor price to pay for the drastic reduction I forsee in "crimes of violence" against WOMEN not to mention the drop off in armed crimes when Female shop keepers and bus drivers can just fire away at "Perps". If they aim well, think of all the money that could be saved in the Courts and Jail "rotating system".

I should mention that ALL TRAINING in the use of firearms should be free and compulsary. I'm sure the NRA is capable of setting that up for a suitable fee from the taxpayers. I would like to see them add a special session on : how to "AIM AT ABUSIVE MALES" and how to hit the gonads of a Rapist.

In the case where some WOMAN can't afford a weapon, I see no reason that some private charities and the NRA would not consider giving them one.

Now while I'm sure some of the Liberals here object to MY thoughts on WEAPONS, they should also remember that I think the "highest and best use" for LEFTISTS is a a "new menu item" at the Lions House at the nearest ZOO.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), July 24, 2000.


Lars, Lars, Lars. What's with the obscenities and the ad hominems? Fresh out of arguments? ;-)

CPR, I am not opposed to gun ownership. However, a gun is not a magic wand, it is a tool. It will only protect you if you know what you're doing with it and you're prepared to use it.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), July 24, 2000.


-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), July 24, 2000.

USE THE FREAKING NET. There is a great deal of evidence that you have landed on your head too often.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), July 24, 2000.


Tarz,

My remark was out of character. I am usually a mild-mannered dude, sort of a poor man's Decker or Flint.

But altho I don't support cpr's foaming at the mouth rhetoric, I do favor the 2nd ammendment as it stands. I'm glad that you do too. I mostly favor it for political reasons (an armed citizenry being a partial deterrance against a totaltarian state) but I also favor it for reasons of self defense.

I asked cpr to summarize the Luby's atrocity of a few years ago, because it was a Texas event and it dramatizes the need for self defense. I don't remember the story except that it took place in a small town in TX fairly recently (late 80s or 90s) where a nutcase crashed his car into this cafeteria and opened fire on the defenseless customers. He killed 20 or so. At the time, it was against TX law to carry a loaded weapon. A lady who survived brought suit against the state because that law had prevented anyone from defending themselves. I don't know the current status of TX carry-laws.

Personally, I bought my first gun last year at age 61. I am licensed to carry. I don't carry it on my person so I would be defenseless in a Luby's-type incident. But I do carry it loaded in my car. I can neither fight or flight so if my car breaks down in the wrong place, I want to have it with me. I am no danger to myself or to anyone else.

What's with the plural? I only used one ad hom and one obscenity and they were combined.-)

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), July 24, 2000.



>> I'm sure some of the Liberals here object to MY thoughts on WEAPONS <<

No objections at all, cpr. Your thoughts on weapons can travel out into the marketplace of ideas and, if they have merit, they will prevail.

May I suggest that you set up a soapbox on a street corner in Dallas and preach your ideas to the passersby. You can yell if you like. (C'mon, I know how you like to yell. Why not let go and live a little?)

As for the merit of your ideas, I'm not sold. Women (and men) are already free to purchase a wide variety of weapons, suited to every pocketbook. Guns are among them and are very popular right now.

So, what evidence is there that every woman who wants to own and master a weapon has not already purchased one, or that giving a weapon to a woman who has no desire to own it, to master it, or to use it will make any difference in crime rates?

As far as I can see, the only evidence you are proposing is that you imagine it will be a satisfactory solution. I also notice that your imagination places most of its emphasis on revenge, manifested in terms of carnage and bloodshed. Lovely. Just lovely.

Just do me this, cpr. Make sure that if you finally do pull that trigger while targeting another human that your judgement is perfectly sound and the result is justifiable. I'd hate to have you blast away and hit some innocent because you were jumping at shadows.

You might also want to get a reality check. I suggest you talk to a police officer who has used his weapon and killed a perp. Find out how gleeful they are about it. Now imagine how gleeful most women would feel. There is nothing glorious or happy about defending yourself by ripping holes in other people. It may be necessary, but it is a painful, horrible necessity.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), July 24, 2000.


Knowing how careful my wife is with her car keys I have a little problem with her being given a gun...

-- The Toner (The_Toner@spam.com), July 24, 2000.

I'd like to see gun training as part of a standard school curriculum, including how to use it and how not to, when to shoot and when not to. I'd like to see a national open-carry law (in *favor* of open carry, that is). But the decision to be armed should be up to each of us.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), July 24, 2000.

>> I'd like to see gun training as part of a standard school curriculum <<

As an elective, I hope.

The schools (read: classroom teachers) are already carrying an unmercifully heavy load of social standard-bearing as it is. Every time somebody decides some or other piece of knowledge would be A Good Thing for some young people to learn, no matter how large or small, practical or abstract, obvious or subtle, trivial or important, they get the bright idea that some classroom teacher should shoehorn it into their teaching day somehow.

Just how many nails can you drive into one board, anyway? Well, there's no end to nails, but there is an end to space on that board. And an end to time spent in school. And an end to every teacher's ability to teach all things to all people.

The time will come when either we'll have to wave goodbye to our kids from age 6 to age 21, so they can live on school premises full time and have lessons around the clock. Or else we'll have to curb our appetite for cramming more Good Things into the curriculum.

Other than that, I think it is a fine idea.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), July 24, 2000.


In view of the Domestic Violence that quietly runs rampant in our society, giving every woman a gun is just plain stupid. A Significant Other who is so inclined will simply have a new opportunity to use that weapon against her and the death toll of abused women will skyrocket. It's already high enough. If you want to help women protect themselves, teach them Martial Arts - nobody can steal that away from them.

And with the statistics indicating that one out of four women will experience some type of abuse and/or physical violence in their lifetime, if we were to castrate or otherwise harm their attackers, we'd have a national plague of extremely gimpy/wimpy men. That's already high enough too. -g-

As far as fully arming the General Public At Large is concerned, that would definitely have some merit if we didn't have an already stressed population ready to flip out at the slightest provocation. I mean, we've got dads killing each other at their kid's hockey game as it is. I can just see our current problems with Road Rage turning into a national pasttime of Road *Kill*. "Hey, you cut me off....Kapow!"

On the other hand, Lars brings up a good point. If only a few of the patrons of Luby's had been armed, the criminal may have been less inclined to stage his attack if the fear of *counterattack* was more of a risk. In this regard, releasing the restrictions for "carry permits" for those choosing to arm themselves and make the effort to become fully proficient in the use of their weapon would go a long way. It would still leave the criminal guessing and somewhat at risk. But to distribute guns like candy to just about anyone would be a beeeeeg mistake.

-- LunaC (FullyArmed@Protected.com), July 24, 2000.



If I'm not mistaken, Israel requires their young adults to spend a year or two in the military where they are responsibly trained in the use of firearms. I've always thought that National Service of this type was a damned good idea. Unfortunately, I doubt it would fly well here in the U.S.

-- LunaC (Protected@Safe.com), July 24, 2000.

Luna:

Thanks for injecting some humor into this thread. My ex-husband had a temper that scared everyone around him. He was one of those folks where if the phone didn't work, he'd rip it off the wall and throw it across the room. I'd never seen this side of him while we were dating. It's one of the reasons why I believe in living with someone for a GOOD long time [is 25 years enough?] before marrying them.

Anyway, he was a gun freak, as well. He had EVERYTHING, ranging from pistols to automatics. He also sold weapons and weapon parts. At one point in our married life, he was investigated regarding the sale of automatic weapon parts. He was nervous about the whole thing and expected me to support him. My theory was "You wouldn't be nervous about it if you knew you weren't breaking the law." In my mind, there's something maniacal about a man that sits on the couch in the frontroom shooting an empty gun at a wall just because it makes him feel good. I didn't stick around after that.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), July 24, 2000.


What we have here is not only an ethical issue but an interesting technical challenge; ie, how to design an effective but nonlethal defensive weapon. Guns have been around for hundreds of years. I know there are nonlethal crowd control weapons but the civil-liberties folks don't like them. And for good reason--a rubber bullet can put out an eye or even kill.

What we need is a Captain Kirk stun gun. Even that kind of weapon could be used in the commission of crime as well as in the deterrance of crime but I think that, on balance, an effective non-lethal weapon will be developed and will be a good thing.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), July 24, 2000.


Anita - My ex-husband had a temper that scared everyone around him. He was one of those folks where if the phone didn't work, he'd rip it off the wall and throw it across the room.

Sounds like we were married to the same guy! lol After a year's worth of facilitating Battered Women's Support Groups, it turns out that "THOSE" guys are all the same, right down to the EXACT words they use to try and intimidate women, almost as though they were all reading the same script somewhere in the sky. It would be funny if it weren't so sad and oftentimes tragic.

I'd never seen this side of him while we were dating.

'Ya never do! They're masters at keeping their Evil Twin in the closet until they've made "The Conquest". Then all hell breaks loose 'cuz they know we're likely to Stand By Our Man no matter what 'cuz we loooooove them! What they don't anticipate are the feisty, independent women such as ourselves who quickly say "I don't THINK SO, pal!" and walk out the door. That's when a woman is MOST at risk...and most in need of protection. And unfortunately, restraining orders are nothing more than a piece of paper. It was at this point in my past that I purchased my first firearm.

-- LunaC (IHearYa@BeenThere.com), July 24, 2000.


Lars - What we have here is not only an ethical issue but an interesting technical challenge; ie, how to design an effective but nonlethal defensive weapon.

If we handled the ethical part of the equation first and people were raised with a healthy respect for life and non-violence, then the technical part of the equation wouldn't be as much of a concern except for law enforcement.

-- LunaC (ArmedButPe@ceful.com), July 24, 2000.


Caught the build-up for the 'Coast-to-Coast' radio show last night about the guy who put himself in 'the most dangerous places'. I figured for most women that answer would be a no-brainer.

Shocked to say I've been there, too.

-- flora (***@__._), July 24, 2000.


Luna,

I agree but that won't happen in our lifetime.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), July 24, 2000.


Lars - I can't argue that! But a girl can WISH, can't she? -g-

-- LunaC (OnTheSamePage@True.com), July 24, 2000.

Luna:

Had I been so smart at a young age, I would have left him earlier, but as it was, I saw the symptoms after years 2 or 3, and had been raised to believe that marriage was forever.

He never laid a hand on me or our kids. He just made everyone jumpy all the time, because we never knew when he'd go OFF. I didn't leave until after 19 years. I've been with my current SO for more than 10 years. Don't even bring up the subject of marriage. I want to ENSURE this guy is stable first. Maybe when we're 70? I must admit that it's been a pleasure to simply relax and be myself the last 10 years.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), July 24, 2000.


Luna C,

If we handled the ethical part of the equation first and people were raised with a healthy respect for life and non-violence, then the technical part of the equation wouldn't be as much of a concern except for law enforcement.

Look at your ex,

'Ya never do! They're masters at keeping their Evil Twin in the closet until they've made "The Conquest". Then all hell breaks loose 'cuz they know we're likely to Stand By Our Man no matter what 'cuz we loooooove them! What they don't anticipate are the feisty, independent women such as ourselves who quickly say "I don't THINK SO, pal!" and walk out the door.

Do you think these kind of people don't know better?... fooled you until you were married?

This is a behavior type problem, and there are many of them, and not all confined the the males side of the species... let me give you an example that I've seen over and over again.

My "ex" ( we were never married but we were together for 8+ years ) was a 5' 3", 110 lbs. blonde bombshell all thro our relationship. 2 years after we broke up, she was married, and weighed almost 200 lbs. 6 months after her divorce she was back down to 110.

My last steady girl friend was sweet as pie for the first 6 months. She had bad PMS but beings we both knew about it, it was manageable, and we were considering moving in together... until she became complacent about it. She became a screaming bitch for 1 week per month and by the time we broke up, for 2 weeks a month.

These are behavior problems just like the one you described, they know and can do better, they just don't.

-- Mr. Slippery (slip@slide.cum), July 24, 2000.


Anita - When I was checking in to the local Holiday Inn with my dog on a regular basis and they knew me by name and kept a room reserved close to the exits so I could conveniently walk my trusty critter companion, I knew I had a serious problem.

But when the SOB was sitting on my chest with a sock in my mouth, pinning down my arms with his knees and choking me to the point where the room started going dim, I knew it was unquestionably time to leave. I broke all speed records statistically - I split only after two MONTHS! That's gotta' be one of the shortest marriages around these here parts.

This was more than 8 years ago and would you believe the guy STILL leaves messages on my answering machine telling me he loves me? Yeah, right! What a sick pup! Sadly, there's waaaaay more of them out there than anybody realizes. And you can't tell just by looking at them!

-- LunaC (Alive@CloseCalls.com), July 24, 2000.


Luna and Mr. Slippery:

I couldn't endure that again. I know there's a poster here who calls us whores for living together without being married, but I prefer that to being married and jumpy all the time. One bad experience can provide enough baggage for a lifetime. If my memory serves me, I met my current SO in about 1971 or 1972. We worked at the same company and became friends. He was married, and I was married. YEARS later, we were still in touch, and he got divorced about 5 years before I did. He thought I was joking when I told him I didn't know him well enough to marry him. 8 years isn't enough. 20 years isn't enough. I'm not even convinced that 30 years is enough. I think Mr. Slippery hit the nail on the head: There's something that changes when folks get married. For years we're nice to each other, keep ourselves fit, and then suddenly a piece of paper turns us into fat, obnoxious slobs. I'm exaggerating, and I know it, but I think you get my point.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), July 24, 2000.


Some people, are plenty stupid. Look at all your yupee answers. You have not ever experienced a War, you haven't known hardship of any kind. You are are a bunch of central air conditioner/heaters, washers and dryers, instant food, gratification morons who think the the good times shall roll forever. There were many who lay down their lives, before you, blood on the fields. Shall the Good Times Roll Forever? Only if you are willing to take up arms to maintain as those who did before you. Your choice.

-- Dumbing down (of@merica.com), July 24, 2000.

Mr. Slippery - Do you think these kind of people don't know better?

Sure they know better. The difference between them and us is that they don't give a damn!

I can't speak for the women in your life (although I agree that women who are predisposed can be just as violent as men in abusive situations) but my former husband was a dyed in the wool Sociopath. Previous to my encounter with him I believed that with a little love, support, and counseling, every problem had an answer. After my "ex" I am convinced that Evil exists in the world and that some people are so broken they can NOT be fixed.

... fooled you until you were married?

Yup. It's a classic M.O. of "those" kinda' guys. They expertly hide their negative side because they know if they were to expose who they really were, all bets would be off. It's a game to them...a game of power and control and they'll do whatever it takes to WIN the game. That's why women are at most risk when they leave their abusers...the men see that they're losing the game and will even resort to killing the woman to "prove" their superiority. It's a truly sick psychology.

As for the PMS explosions, I suspect the PMS was merely an excuse to behave badly. Your girlfriend was on her best behavior until she needed to release her anxieties, insecurities and agressions and - bam - the PMS defense was thrown on the table as a justification. That's a classic MO too...the abusers always point the finger at somebody or something outside of themselves and never take personal responsibility for their actions. Sad but true.

If you look back on your relationship, you went through a "honeymoon" phase where she was sweet as pie (reeling in your loving emotions and hooking you back into the relationship in the process), then things would get tense and you'd walk on eggshells until the explosion finally (and predictably) occured. Then she'd be totally apologetic, loving and kind and the whole process would start all over again. Like I said, it's CLASSIC behavior in the annals of psychology.

-- LunaC (Single@Advantages.com), July 24, 2000.


Interesting to note, my answer was for original question. Then comes the posts from Hell, to confuse. For those, who can discern.

-- Dumbing down (of@merica.com), July 24, 2000.

Anita, I've seen it over and over with almost all of my friends. After that little piece of paper gets signed, or one person in the relationship starts feeling comfortable, it becomes a hell on earth... and people wonder why the institution of marriage is almost dead...

-- Mr. Slippery (slip@slide.cum), July 24, 2000.

"Some people, are plenty stupid. Look at all your yupee answers. You have not ever experienced a War, you haven't known hardship of any kind. You are are a bunch of central air conditioner/heaters, washers and dryers, instant food, gratification morons who think the the good times shall roll forever. There were many who lay down their lives, before you, blood on the fields. Shall the Good Times Roll Forever? Only if you are willing to take up arms to maintain as those who did before you. Your choice.

-- Dumbing down (of@merica.com), July 24, 2000."

The whole point of the "posts from hell" are to demonstrate that all folks aren't stable enough to allow them to "take up arms." WE haven't experienced a war? Does Vietnam ring a bell with you? That would be the war where the folks who returned were the losers. The lucky folks died there and didn't have to endure the insults of the public and the inability to find a job.

Who are these people that took up arms before me? My parents never owned guns. [I can't go back further than that without leaving the country.]

I should get a gun to ensure good times keep rolling? Gee, had Luna's ex-husband had that philosophy, she might have found a gun in her mouth instead of a sock. "Do you feel the good times, Honey?"

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), July 25, 2000.


Anita, for all you kind handle, I suspect you are from another nation, hoping to create havoc. Interesting enough, I have seen your handle, for two years. Hope I am wrong.

-- We won't lie down (and we@won'tgoeasy.com), July 25, 2000.

Spooky!

-- (nemesis@awol.com), July 25, 2000.

"for all you kind handle, I suspect you are from another nation, hoping to create havoc."

I live right here in the U.S.A. [in Texas]. Is English YOUR native language? If so, I'd appreciate a translation of "for all you kind handle." It makes NO sense to me.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), July 25, 2000.


Count me as another woman who married THAT man in 1977. After suffering a number of VIOLENT physical beatings I would sit in the living room at night with a can of pepper under the cushion. During the day I "lifted" large cans of tomato sauce to build strengh. The more I fought back the harder I got hit. Had I had a gun I would have threatned him with it. I left him in 1978 with our son.

In 1992 he was still in 'control' mode. He found me standing alone at our sons baseball game and told me he was still going to kill me and then laughed.

To this day I 'jump' when someone surprises me.

-- Debra (Thisis@it.com), July 25, 2000.


When my grandmother was a young lass (sixteen), she was married off to someone her parents thought would make a good husband.

Things went well for the first week. Then, one night, she served dinner late.

Her then-husband backhanded her hard. He was a big man, she was a tiny woman, barely 5' tall. He stood over her, kicking her and yelling that he would beat her if she failed her "wifely duties" again.

That night, he awoke to find a butcher knife pressed into his throat so tightly it was almost cutting him. My grandmother was sitting on his chest holding the knife. She said, "You may be bigger than me, but you've got to sleep sometime," She then broke the nightstand lamp over his head and escaped while he was passed out.

She got the marriage anulled and went to live with her older sister in California. She didn't marry again until she was damn good and ready.

She told me about this incident toward the end of her life. I'll never forget what she said at the end of that story. "Anyone who's close enough to hurt you is close enough to be hurt by you,"

-- Citizen Ruth (ruth_parker@yahoo.com), July 25, 2000.


Men basically suck.

How in God's name did you wonderful ladies end up marrying such trash? Manipulation, I suppose. Glad to see you all made it out of your nightmares with your lives somewhat in tact. That scumbags such as your former husbands would go so far as to rob each of you of your ability to feel secure just makes me boil inside.

Perhaps an invitation proffered to each maniac to attend the LV gathering. We could take them out to the desert, tie them down, strip them and leave them to roast in the desert sun. Vultures need to eat too, you know. Just a thought.

-- Bingo1 (howe9@shentel.net), July 25, 2000.


For the record, I didn't marry the chap, even though he'd proposed many times. He became obsessed with me after we disentangled. A firearm was not involved, and as a matter of fact I married a calm, accomplished marksman. It probably gives me an inflated sense of security.

-- flora (***@__._), July 25, 2000.

I have never beaten a woman. I have never verbally abused a woman. What's wrong with me?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), July 25, 2000.

I have never hit a woman either, though I've been sorely tempted. In the immortal words of Chris Rock, "Bullshit there's never a reason to hit a woman! There's a reason to hit everybody. There's a reason to kick an old man down the stairs. JUST DON'T DO IT!"

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), July 25, 2000.

off

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), July 25, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ