|
Post by The Resister on Jun 19, 2022 16:45:36 GMT
I want to discuss how to dramatically reduce mass shootings without gun control. We could dramatically reduce mass shootings (which would affect all firearm violence) and we can do it without gun control, jeopardizing the Second Amendment, or spending millions / billions of dollars implementing more bureaucracies. For those who want bumper sticker solutions (stupid ideas that fit on a bumper sticker, but do nothing to solve the issue), here is your eye candy: In order to keep firearms out of the wrong hands, keep the bodies of the wrong hands in jails, prisons, mental health facilities, and / or under constant supervision. That's an over-simplified solution, but forms the basis for a REAL DISCUSSION. This proposal is much more doable than thinking you can some how round up 400 million + firearms and prevent people from building their own firearms. The people who have been victimized by mass shooters are always pawns for the left. The liberals are always trying to enlist the victims of shootings with insane ideas like background checks, banning high capacity magazines, banning weapons, raising age limits, Red Flag Gun Laws, unfairly prosecuting " domestic abusers," registering weapons, etc. etc. We cannot even begin to fathom what a person goes through when they lose a family member to senseless violence. I got a glimpse of this after a family member (by marriage) and her five year old son, along with the family dog were gunned down in their home by a jealous boyfriend. I say it's just a glimpse because the hurt was much more personal for the parents and grandparents. I can only imagine what they went through, but it didn't change my own mind after three plus decades of researching this issue. Strategy threads are long as are the postings. So I am preparing you for that. The last time I did a thread like this, it took about FIFTY posts before we had covered all the different aspects. But, when you go to put the program in place, it could be explained to someone in about 45 minutes. Is the subject worth 45 minutes of your time right now? Depending upon responses my guess is that we can cover the basics in about a dozen to fifteen replies. If you go into the politics of gun control, your post may get moved. If you want to know whether or not we have a Right to keep and bear Arms, go to this link: resisters.freeforums.net/thread/5/great-american-gun-control-challengeWe will talk about the issue of gun Rights there. This deals with how to solve the issue of mass shootings. Here is a general synopsis of what we will deal with: 1) How does our system (parents, schools, doctors - esp. mental health officials, Big Pharma, and other government officials) CREATE dangerous people via legal drugs 2) How do you identify children / teens that are headed toward a life of violence? 3) How can we build a response team that can help children / teens who are going down a dark path 4) What steps can we take to intervene that will prevent children / teens from growing up to become violent prone individuals that may commit mass shootings? Yes, we DO know who these people are before they lash out in most instances. We can get to the root of the problem long before they act out. Most mass shootings are preventable without any form of gun control. Let's get into it.
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on Jun 20, 2022 2:20:42 GMT
I want to discuss how to dramatically reduce mass shootings without gun control. We could dramatically reduce mass shootings (which would affect all firearm violence) and we can do it without gun control, jeopardizing the Second Amendment, or spending millions / billions of dollars implementing more bureaucracies. For those who want bumper sticker solutions (stupid ideas that fit on a bumper sticker, but do nothing to solve the issue), here is your eye candy: In order to keep firearms out of the wrong hands, keep the bodies of the wrong hands in jails, prisons, mental health facilities, and / or under constant supervision. That's an over-simplified solution, but forms the basis for a REAL DISCUSSION. This proposal is much more doable than thinking you can some how round up 400 million + firearms and prevent people from building their own firearms. The people who have been victimized by mass shooters are always pawns for the left. The liberals are always trying to enlist the victims of shootings with insane ideas like background checks, banning high capacity magazines, banning weapons, raising age limits, Red Flag Gun Laws, unfairly prosecuting " domestic abusers," registering weapons, etc. etc. We cannot even begin to fathom what a person goes through when they lose a family member to senseless violence. I got a glimpse of this after a family member (by marriage) and her five year old son, along with the family dog were gunned down in their home by a jealous boyfriend. I say it's just a glimpse because the hurt was much more personal for the parents and grandparents. I can only imagine what they went through, but it didn't change my own mind after three plus decades of researching this issue. Strategy threads are long as are the postings. So I am preparing you for that. The last time I did a thread like this, it took about FIFTY posts before we had covered all the different aspects. But, when you go to put the program in place, it could be explained to someone in about 45 minutes. Is the subject worth 45 minutes of your time right now? Depending upon responses my guess is that we can cover the basics in about a dozen to fifteen replies. If you go into the politics of gun control, your post may get moved. If you want to know whether or not we have a Right to keep and bear Arms, go to this link: resisters.freeforums.net/thread/5/great-american-gun-control-challengeWe will talk about the issue of gun Rights there. This deals with how to solve the issue of mass shootings. Here is a general synopsis of what we will deal with: 1) How does our system (parents, schools, doctors - esp. mental health officials, Big Pharma, and other government officials) CREATE dangerous people via legal drugs 2) How do you identify children / teens that are headed toward a life of violence? 3) How can we build a response team that can help children / teens who are going down a dark path 4) What steps can we take to intervene that will prevent children / teens from growing up to become violent prone individuals that may commit mass shootings? Yes, we DO know who these people are before they lash out in most instances. We can get to the root of the problem long before they act out. Most mass shootings are preventable without any form of gun control. Let's get into it. So, how would you feel if I told you that most mass shooters are CREATED by their parents, school officials, the medical / mental health community (especially psychologists and psychiatrists), and Big Pharma? How would you feel to find out that if you change public policy and deal with problem children and teens, you can virtually eliminate mass shootings? Having studied this for over three decades and having volunteered as a foster parent, I have done research and employed practical experience to prove to myself that this works, there were some things I've learned. And, it isn't rocket science. Salvador Ramos, the eighteen year old shooter at the Robb Elementary School in Uvalde was known as " School Shooter" by his classmates long before he quit school. Here is the million dollar question as it were: If the children and teens in school knew what Ramos was, how come you suppose the adults around him didn't know? The last person to have a fight physical fight with Nicholas Cruz (the Parkland shooter in Florida) was Rock Deschamps and he wasn't the first person to be in a fight with Cruz. They kept letting Cruz go - and the reason? The reason is the key to the solution. The only thing that would have happened to Nicholas Cruz was a trip through the criminal justice system. On at least FORTY NINE occasions leading up to the Parkland shooting, Nicholas Cruz generated a police report and / or a suspension or expulsion from school. What had to happen before society would listen and watch the warning signs and then ACT on them? All those warning signs and afterward, people would say I'm not surprised he did it. Pay attention to what those who knew Cruz told the media: " Neighbors of the gunman in the Florida school shooting are speaking out, claiming they are "not surprised that it was him." Also see this: heavy.com/news/2018/02/nikolas-cruz/popculture.com/trending/news/florida-school-shooting-nikolas-cruz-neighbors/Savador Ramos was nicknamed the "School Shooter" by his classmates. What did they say? School Shooter before he ever owned a firearm. How about Sandy Hook's Adam Lanza? Check out what was known about him? www.cnn.com/2014/11/21/justice/newtown-shooter-adam-lanza-report/index.htmlIf you begin to study all this variety of mass shooters (the young ones who shoot up schools and malls, etc.) you see a pattern of commonalities. You also see a system that misses " red flags" as they call them. What are the red flags (sic) and why did they get missed? Once you understand that, you can understand the solution. So, first let us examine the general trajectory of the making of a mass shooter: In many ( not all) cases, the child begins with being treated with Ritalin or Adderall for ADD / ADHD. School officials may complain to a parent or it might be referred to the Dept. of Family and Children Services (DFACS) aka Child Protective Services (CPS) or some name close to that. For many others, the introduction to drugs comes later with legal opioids. At some point a lot of children / teens may be introduced to SSRIs ( selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.) Roughly 99 percent of all mass shootings save of political jihadists are committed by young white males who are on or had been on SSRIs and / or had been under the care of a psychologist or psychiatrist within a year of doing committing the shooting. This begins the initial stage of understanding WHO is going to commit an act of violence and we have to recognize that the very FIRST thing we have to do is to change our attitude and accept the fact that the use of drugs should not be the first (and many times only) option we employ. BTW, I tried to deliver that spiel to my state representative, Greg Kennard, who stopped me thirty seconds into it and said he wasn't interested. Reason? He said he worked in the mental health field. Really? His profile on the .gov website says he's a minister. He's a bigot and a liar and that is a prefect example of why this will have to become a citizen initiative. He is a typical example of the push back we face by owning up to the facts. Public policy doesn't dictate that we begin looking into a child/ teen's life life to make a determination as to what is wrong. Nooooo. We start administering drugs. Does the child / teen eat properly at home? Is there chaos and conflict; discord and division at home? Do both parents live in the home and what is home life like? Is this a single parent home? How much time does the child / teen spend doing homework, chores, sleeping, computer time, and having actual human contact? These and many factors should be looked at before determining that a child / teen needs a drug. Drugs can't fix what is wrong in many households. So, again, this proposal begins with eliminating drugs as a first option and begin studying non-drug therapies. More later.
|
|
professorx
Global Moderator
Site Administrator
Posts: 413
|
Post by professorx on Jun 20, 2022 17:57:57 GMT
Are you saying we should have a federal law to change public policies toward prescribing drugs? Would this proposal be a federal law or handled by the state?
Don't worry about Kennard. He is a man who thinks that the state government revolves around what he wants. He sees his constituency as a rubber stamp for what he wants. He won't last much longer.
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on Jun 21, 2022 3:25:47 GMT
Are you saying we should have a federal law to change public policies toward prescribing drugs? Would this proposal be a federal law or handled by the state? Don't worry about Kennard. He is a man who thinks that the state government revolves around what he wants. He sees his constituency as a rubber stamp for what he wants. He won't last much longer. IMO, this change must take place at the state level. It would be easier to implement and if I had my way, I'd get the federal government out of the business of education. One thing is for sure, this entire proposal would have to be implemented if it were to do what we wanted it to do. We are a society that has created the majority of the drug users, starting with " legal" drugs. Americans consume over 80 percent of the world's opioid supply, 85 percent of the Ritalin, and for every drug abuser in a drug rehab facility, there are more than TEN drug addicts in prison. Silly Americans. We cannot punish the drug addiction our society heaped onto the youth of this country. Approximately 9.4 percent of the children in America have been diagnosed with ADD / ADHD: www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/data.htmlThat number is bogus and slowly it is coming out that ADHD can be controlled with things like diet, exercise, sleep, etc. Keep that in mind. We will cover it later. We've briefly hit on the fact that mass shooters all pass through a certain trajectory in their lives. There are approximately sixteen (16) markers that indicated that a person will commit a violent act in their lifetime. I didn't say they would be caught; I am not suggesting that all of them will commit a mass shooting. But, they will all commit and act of violence whether they're ever caught or not. Once a youth hits 16 of these markers, they will break the law. Many may never be caught and held accountable, but ALL mass shooters meet at least EIGHT (8) of the sixteen markers. They are: 1) Mass shooters tend to be white males 17 to 40 years of age 2) Many will come from single parent homes and or live with other relatives (grandparents, etc.) 3) Most will have been bullied in school 4) They will rack up records for multiple violations of school policy and be expelled / suspended regularly 5) They will tend to generate police records 6) Most will be obsessed with violent social media content 7) Mass shooters tend to be known to harm animals and torture them 8) Mass shooters tend to be loners 9) They tend to have violent tempers and get into many verbal and / or physical confrontations 10) They tend to have been on mind altering drugs and virtually all mass shooters save of political jihadists were on SSRIs (99 percent) 11) In many cases the parents of mass shooters are drug addicts, alcoholics, and / or suffering mental illness 12) Mass shooters tend to make threats and generate a lot of reports from those who feel uneasy about the attitude of the potential mass shooter 13 Many mass shooters tend to be an only child or the "black sheep" of the family 14) Many mass shooters tend to self medicate and / or not take their prescription drugs properly 15) Regardless of how their individual trajectory begins, their grades and attendance fall off in their teens 16) Mass shooters will have been ignored by the bulk of society while their actions are screaming out that they need help We know, in advance, who is going to commit violent acts. Society cannot solve the problem as the government only throws money at the problem. The government will boost the amount of money they spend on mental health; however psychologists and psychiatrists disagree with the idea that the child / teen may not be at fault. Therefore they wholly reject the policy of providing help before the violence becomes a normal way of life for a child / teen. We are going to talk about that rectify that situation in this thread. What can we do? How can we help the youth of America other than changing the policy of drugs first and most of the time the only option we pursue?
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on Jun 21, 2022 17:47:49 GMT
I had left this link with liberals as well as with gun owners. NEITHER side deems it to be important enough to comment on. Without it, gun owners will see a demise of the Second Amendment and the left will continue to have a steady supply of pretexts by which to dismantle the Constitution. Back to the topic:
We've talked briefly about the fact that there is a mental health crisis in America exacerbated by the philosophy that we begin treating every symptom with drugs as opposed to finding the root cause of the problem. This manifests itself in drug abuse, crime, homelessness, and even mass shootings. You would think that once a child / teen has been in trouble on multiple occasions, missed a lot of school, and has low scores in school that somebody would want to know what is going on. My contention is that if you addressed this before someone like Nicholas Cruz, Salvador Ramos, Adam Lanza, etc., etc. ad infinitum acted out and committed mass shootings they, most likely, would not be known as mass shooters today. What has to happen to people before they figure out a child / teen with a dozen or more interactions with police and having been expelled / suspended has a problem? And why can't we see that it may not be the child / teen's fault?
The right is skeptical of what I say next, claiming that it will somehow be turned into an opportunity for the left to confiscate firearms. That is absolute B.S. The reason being is that DFACS / CPS has had the power to do what I'm about to suggest. They simply haven't had the initiative and they haven't had the right kind of motivation. They do it on a limited scale. So, we change the attitude toward drugs and require non - drug therapies. We've figured out how to identify those who may be in dire need of help. But HOW do we implement a program that actually helps these kids? The current scheme is to throw money at schools and mental health officials (who are to a man... or woman almost always anti-gun) and tell them to go out and solve the problem. Could we be any more ignorant! All they understand is feed the kids some drugs.
Here is what needs to happen: The state farms out truancy and dealing with problem children to a private entity. These people will serve the functions of social workers, truancy officers, therapists, etc. for wayward / unruly children and teens. Suppose that your child is suspected of having ADD / ADHD and is having a problem in school. This private agency - and let's give it a name like Youth Development Services (YDS) is called in. They would immediately begin to figure out whether the problem is the child OR the parents... or some other mitigating factor. Drugs won't help a child that has bad eating, sleeping, exercise, study, and social habits. Drugs won't help a neglected child in a single parent home or one in which the parents are drug abusers. Drugs won't help a child living in a house dominated by chaos, confusion, conflict, and dysfunction. So, trained counselors are called in from YDS to begin an assessment of the child.
An interview with the parents / guardian to assess the living conditions of the child would be in order. A couple of interviews with the child by counselors would be in order. A child / teen may have one reaction toward one counselor and a different one with another. You have to find out who the child / teen works best with. It would be the job of that YDS counselor to determine if the problem is the child and / or their environment. The YDS counselor would then come up with a plan to begin treatment. If it's one where ADD / ADHD is suspected, then diet, exercise, the rights amount of sleep, study, and socializing are maintained and evaluated. It could be that the parents need parenting classes; it could be that a child / teen is being abused at home. Either way, you do something about it. You don't wait weeks or months, but right away. Let that soak in. More to come.
|
|
professorx
Global Moderator
Site Administrator
Posts: 413
|
Post by professorx on Jun 23, 2022 3:17:00 GMT
My take on this thus far is to stop drugging children, have troubled children monitored by a private entity that can evaluate children based on a quantitative and qualitative basis, and let them coordinate the protocols necessary to find the root cause of each child's problem. Am I close?
We have a framework of what to look for in that list of commonalities of mass shooters. When children are exhibiting the key markers the YDS springs into action to determine the root cause of the problem and begin a plan of treatment that gets the child back into a lifestyle that has some measure of normalcy.
That state representative did look over this thread and he got back to me with a bogus excuse. He said we can't turn those jobs over to a private entity. He says it won't work. That is ironic. They turned the probation services over to a private entity. That private company can go to a judge and make probationers obey their PO or go back to the Greystone Motel. He is terribly uneducated as to how the system works.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2022 3:27:51 GMT
My take on this thus far is to stop drugging children, have troubled children monitored by a private entity that can evaluate children based on a quantitative and qualitative basis, and let them coordinate the protocols necessary to find the root cause of each child's problem. Am I close? We have a framework of what to look for in that list of commonalities of mass shooters. When children are exhibiting the key markers the YDS springs into action to determine the root cause of the problem and begin a plan of treatment that gets the child back into a lifestyle that has some measure of normalcy. That state representative did look over this thread and he got back to me with a bogus excuse. He said we can't turn those jobs over to a private entity. He says it won't work. That is ironic. They turned the probation services over to a private entity. That private company can go to a judge and make probationers obey their PO or go back to the Greystone Motel. He is terribly uneducated as to how the system works. Did he explain why? Private has always done a better job than any government agency in all areas. In a private company if the employee doesn't do a good job they will be fired. government workers do not get fired for anything, including murder by negligence. It sounds to me that his real reason is that the concept or privatization, jeopardizes his job too which should also be privatized.
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on Jun 23, 2022 14:31:57 GMT
My take on this thus far is to stop drugging children, have troubled children monitored by a private entity that can evaluate children based on a quantitative and qualitative basis, and let them coordinate the protocols necessary to find the root cause of each child's problem. Am I close? We have a framework of what to look for in that list of commonalities of mass shooters. When children are exhibiting the key markers the YDS springs into action to determine the root cause of the problem and begin a plan of treatment that gets the child back into a lifestyle that has some measure of normalcy. That state representative did look over this thread and he got back to me with a bogus excuse. He said we can't turn those jobs over to a private entity. He says it won't work. That is ironic. They turned the probation services over to a private entity. That private company can go to a judge and make probationers obey their PO or go back to the Greystone Motel. He is terribly uneducated as to how the system works. Did he explain why? Private has always done a better job than any government agency in all areas. In a private company if the employee doesn't do a good job they will be fired. government workers do not get fired for anything, including murder by negligence. It sounds to me that his real reason is that the concept or privatization, jeopardizes his job too which should also be privatized. Let's face it. The government is one giant clusterph^(k when dealing with this issue. The cops generate reports; DFACS / CPS is marginally involved and they are incompetent and as about as effective as a eunuch in a brothel. Then the politicians want to throw money at the mental health community in order to solve this. The mental health community is solidly anti-gun. It is amazing that the pro-gun side can't see what we're proposing. Government officials and anyone acting at their behest already have the authority to intervene in any cases wherein a minor has established probable cause that a preliminary investigation is warranted. When any child/ teen is missing school, has substandard grades, is generating police reports, is having disciplinary issues in school, is making threats, has violent social media content, etc., etc., etc. then someone needs to be investigating. The general protocol is for the mental health community to be involved and their standard answer is prescribing drugs. We have DFACS / CPS, but they take months and sometimes years to even address an issue. People that work for the government are not motivated to do a good job. They get paid regardless of the success / failure of their work. The mental health community IS the problem. So, what is needed is private coordinators. Private coordinators try to nail down the real problem. Suppose that what you have is the child of a single parent. In the instant case it is usually boys living with their mother or some substitute. The most influential force in a young person's life is the parent of the same sex as the young person. When fathers are absent or just physically inaccessible, for whatever reason then a child / teen is left to adapt to the situation on their own. We've looked at what should be done in the case of ADD / ADHD. You visit the home situation and see if you can remedy the situation with diet, exercise, sleep, adequate study time, chores, limited computer time, and reviewing the social interactions of the child / teen. Identifying the real issue is relatively easy and the earlier it's dealt with, the greater the chances of success. When a private entity is used, you can measure their success rate by whether or not those treated are getting back in school, having a good attendance record, and improved scores in school. So, in this instance, maybe what is needed is a big brother to intervene in a young person's life and the school becomes involved in identifying other issues that may need to be resolved (the child / teen is being bullied and / or they might need remedial classes.) Finally, a private company would be better suited to deal with private and government services, utilizing both and developing an individual plan to serve the needs of the child / teen. An example might be that a child / teen needs a big brother figure (private sector) and also remedial reading skills (after school - government) and the parent (s) need parenting classes (family court.) One person coordinates all these needs and gets the child / teen the appropriate help ASAP.
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on Jun 24, 2022 18:23:12 GMT
Let's see how this plays out if the proposal were to be implemented:
There would be an office set up and every time a report* is generated about a minor, it would go directly to what we have called the YDS. The YDS gets the report and it is noted that this is not the first time that the child / teen has been having problems. This gives probable cause for a preliminary investigation. A YDS agent is sent out to interview the child / teen. It will be up to the YDS agent whether further action is needed and the child / teen is told that in two weeks, their case will be reviewed. If test scores and attendance do not improve, the next stage of the investigation will commence. It will also commence at any point the child / teen generates another report* within forty five (45) days of the last reported incident.
The second phase of the investigation will be to interview the child / teen again and then to make a physical appearance to the child / teen's home to discuss the issues with the parent(s) / guardians. During this phase the YDS agent may get a sense of the home environment and determine several factors such as, but not limited to:
Single parent home? Living with grandparents? Foster home? Siblings? Any family problems? Evidence of alcohol or drug abuse? The child's routine: how much sleep, hours on the computer, hours spent studying, diet, exercise, outside social interaction
The YDS agent can inform the parent(s) / guardian of the programs that may be of benefit to them that they can voluntarily avail themselves of. There will be a follow-up in thirty (30) business days to see if the child / teen's attendance, grades, and interactions with others is improving. If not, a course of action will be recommended by the YDS agent. If the parents refuse it, the YDS would go to family court and petition for the parent (s) / guardian to comply or lose custody of the child / teen and any other minor children in the house (if the YDS feels necessary.) Let us say that the child / teen is hyperactive and the behavior disrupts class mates and / or affects the child / teen's grades. The YDS agent would be justified in having a counselor interview the child / teen to try and determine if they thought the problem to be related to environment or mental disability. a psychologist could interview the child / teen and give their evaluation. A program would be laid out for counseling sessions AND a plan to improve attendance / grades. A plan of action could be required of the parent (s) / guardian (such as a plan to make sure the child / teen is getting the proper amounts of diet, exercise, study time, etc.) AND the parents may be required to take parenting classes. All of this would precede putting the child / teen on any kind of drugs. Even after that, the monitoring process would be ongoing. the plan may call for the child / teen to have a big brother / big sister to help mentor them; be required to take remedial classes; undergo a drug test if illegal drugs are suspected (and again based upon probable cause.)
* A report is any police report, investigation, report by the school, any suspension / expulsion from school, and any report by citizens to the police, school officials, or other such agencies.
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on Jul 1, 2022 19:16:39 GMT
For this board to be as young as it is, this thread has gotten a lot of views. For whatever reason people who found this thread prefer to respond to it on other forums and not here. So, I've gotten enough feedback and can respond to the criticisms and the support I've gotten. This is kind of a closing statement over the basic premise and if this thread continues, it will focus on details and specifics. You have the general idea.
Based on my experience the left does not want to reduce gun violence. When they are getting their collective asses kicked by the right, they are content to take the losses at a federal level and use that as a strategy to strengthen state laws that the masses will ignore. For example, Biden's recent gun law will give grants to states that pass Red Flag Gun Laws. That is a net win since all liberal states will immediately take advantage of it. That will be a drain on the gun lobby who will now have to fight a potential FIFTY lawsuits (on one issue alone) to show how each state's Red Flag Gun Laws are unconstitutional as they unfairly deprive people of the Right to keep and Bear Arms compared to the citizenry of another state. It's very clearly a 14th Amendment breach of equal protection of the laws. Some RINOs supported Biden on this. Bear that in mind.
I've been presenting the long version of this idea to Congress for years (think decades.) The liberals reject it out of hand because it doesn't include their favorite phrase: gun control. Oh, they agree that would support it IF IT CAME AS PART OF A GUN CONTROL PACKAGE! WTH? This is a bipartisan proposal that gives the left fewer gun deaths and there is NO gun control for the right to fear. It's about freaking saving lives and the Democrats won't agree to it because it isn't about gun control. If you add it into gun control, the right automatically rejects it. The left gets grieving parents of mass shootings to boo hoo and demand gun control while snubbing an idea to SAVE LIVES. They are outright lying hypocrites. They don't give two hoots in Hell about saving any child's life. They care about control.
The right is equally compromised and they lack a moral compass, a direction, and a vision for the future. All they understand is that the United States Supreme Court gave them a ruling here or there that makes them feel warm and fuzzy. They are oblivious as to what state Red Flag Gun Laws will do. What good is a Second Amendment if the left can take it at the state level and on the most spurious grounds? Adding insult to injury one would think that the "Christian" right would feel morally compelled to pass a law that would save lives without spending BILLIONS of dollars to do it. Yet they haven't been willing.
This is a proposal that will save lives. It will not endanger anyone's constitutional Rights. It will make mass shootings an anomaly while saving other lives as well. People with mental disabilities will be detected earlier. That means they get help earlier. It means that they will be put in an environment that can help them earlier. It protects the rest of us from the criminally insane. It is going to reduce the prison population, meaning criminals will be punished and rehabilitated, not just housed. That would have an effect on those who commit suicide (which makes up the bulk of firearm deaths in the U.S.) It's going to reduce the size, power, and scope of government. It is going to take away the pretext of the left telling us we "need" gun control. Enact my proposal and you can resolve a lot of the problems with firearm deaths. Move on to more pressing legislation. Don't you think it's time YOU weighed in on this?
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on Jul 5, 2022 3:06:24 GMT
4 July 2022 - ANOTHER "mass shooting" occurs and those on the right are playing defense when the solution is right here waiting to have someone find the supposed weakness in it or get put on the negotiating table. What has to happen in order to get feedback on this? Any activists want to help get it introduced in the legislature (state or federal?)
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on Jul 6, 2022 14:54:55 GMT
In studying this last mass shooting, Robert Cremo III appears to have been highly influenced by social media. The question is, can social media influence a mass shooter? Here is a little bit of what I found relative to social media and addictions: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5362930/This is a bit more elementary for ease of understanding: www.bustle.com/p/7-ways-social-media-changes-your-brain-according-to-science-9211397So, what I'm saying is that the big thing I've been missing over the years is the effect that social media has in radicalizing the youth. Cremo is not the first mass shooter to be a far left nutjob that trolled right wing rallies and he won't be the last. My working theory (and I'll be watching this and evaluating it) is that social media helps to influence those people susceptible of committing acts of violence. I know, in reason, that this can be done. Someone radicalized a lot of teens and younger adults to become Muslims and nobody could point to any physical human being or organization that was instrumental in the radicalization process. Now, look at the convenient way that mass shootings are being committed so conveniently around the election and during a time when legislators are considering gun control legislation. The sites that Cremo visited; the way he spent the bulk of his time seem to me to be more relevant to his actions than his participation in rallies and events of which he was not connected. The media will blame the right wing and be silent on the real driving force behind what may have driven Cremo (along with other shooters displaying Cremo's methods) that ended in mass shootings. We need to understand this issue and DO something about it. NOW! Immediately after posting that, I found this: www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/what-we-know-about-the-suspect-in-july-4-parade-mass-shooting/ar-AAZgcR1?li=BBnb7Kzwww.msn.com/en-us/news/us/state-police-approved-highland-park-suspects-gun-license-despite-ominous-signs-latest-updates/ar-AAZfYJb?li=BBnb7KzHow is it that the system can tell you, AFTER THE FACT, that these people are displaying behaviors that scream for help and yet not get them that help?
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on May 28, 2023 4:43:15 GMT
I have been on another board and it has generated quite a number of posts and gotten highly emotional for self described "Jeanie O" who claims to be a sociologist and apparently has all the answers. She is triggered when questioned about her monopoly on the truth; that board even deletes my factual posts to make it appear I'm a dumb ass that bitches as much as the left. It's dishonest and it's sickening. But, those interested can always check in here to see what this is all about.
The left loves playing a game. They will tell you they are gun owners and they don't want to outlaw firearms. They will tell you tales of family members that died in defense of this country. Yet they will dishonor the memory of any patriots they may have had by lying about the agenda to overthrow the Constitution of the United States by calling it a democracy and attacking fundamental Liberties on the basis of a popularity contest. Let's be fair and honest. Those people are lying idiots.
Their first play is to yap about "common sense gun laws." Then they provide a story in the news and try to build their case on that and RECENT statistics. What a pantload! In the instant case, on another board, a poster said they were sick of what was happening relative to gun crime. They cited a story of a local man that went on a rampage shooting his weapon in public. The anti and pro - gun factions then began that sell out and irrelevant notion that "stolen" guns were the problem. The problem is the guy in the story didn't have a stolen weapon. Then they pivot to topics like background checks, permits, and eliminating the AR 15 rifle. WTH?
I pointed out on that board that the man accused of this shoot 'em up was not charged with having a stolen weapon; nothing in the charges leads me to believe that the weapon is illegal which means the guy, most likely, went through a background check in order to buy it. Therefore, the proposed solutions by this self proclaimed social engineer would not have affected that guy's actions in the least. Shouldn't the solution be posited so as to address the problem you have put on the table as evidence that said problem exists? I mean the last time I was in the hospital, the doctor determined that my colon was the problem. He didn't waste time trying to find solutions to fix my mouth. He stuck to dealing with my colon. I guess social engineers can't think that far ahead.
Anyway... the left wing social engineers are so self absorbed with their recent statistics and childish propositions that they just repeat the same mantra: "We don't want your guns. We want common sense gun laws. We want a background check, registration and permits. We want to outlaw those AR 15 rifles." Okay, let's talk about it. They sure as HELL won't talk about it on other boards. They don't want the guns, but they want background checks and registration. Registration, historically, is the prelude to confiscation. I wish those damn liars would quit trying to pee down my neck and tell me it's raining. And a background check?
Let me see. It is actually unconstitutional to force people to undergo a background check in order to exercise an unalienable Right. Then there is that question about demanding proof when the legal principle is that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty AND that in order to look into a person's background, you need a warrant based upon probable cause. I want to exercise a guaranteed Right. Where is the probable cause to think I'm going to violate the law? But, let me keep going. A background check only works AFTER an individual has committed a crime. And their mental health records, ESPECIALLY those of a minor are not accessible to law enforcement in most cases. If those records were available, all those mass shooters could not have purchased a weapon after turning 18 unless it was on the black market... BUT, mass shooters (the guys 18 to 26 or so shooting up schools and malls) aren't getting their weapons on the black market. They are undergoing a background check and registering their weapons. So what in the Hell is a background check going to prevent? Again, shouldn't your solutions be calculated so as to remedy the examples you put on the table? I'm just starting on this, so I'll be back with more later.
|
|
|
Post by The Resister on May 29, 2023 18:11:10 GMT
OMG, it's been a busy few days with me defending the Second Amendment on that local board I call ND. It's hard to give them free advertising with a link when they spend so much time fighting to censor what I'm forced to post only here.
Anyway, as I've said many times in the past, left wing lunatics want gun control - total gun control. ONE of the arguments made by the anti-gun crowd is that the AR 15 is a "weapon of war." What in the Hell do they not comprehend about the simple fact that the Second Amendment protects an individual Right to keep and bear Arms for insuring the security of a free State. We cannot insure the security of a free State with flintlocks. That is exactly what we'd end up with. Let's examine some more facts:
Carlos Hathcock was a United States Marine Corps sniper. He was one of the most, if not most, successful snipers with a confirmed kill record of 93 enemy combatants. Others say the actual count could be as high as 400. Hathcock used a Model 70 Winchester bolt action rifle in 30.06 for many of those casualties which, by any stretch of imagination, cannot be called an "assault weapon." However, if people were forced to buy only bolt actions they would become more accurate marksmen and then the left would bitch, moan, groan, cry, and complain. The rifle you used to buy from Sears and receive in the mail would become a deadly sniper rifle and "weapon of war." We've gone from emotion laden buzz words like Saturday Night Specials to sniper rifles and the now ubiquitous "assault weapon." Let's study the past:
During my lifetime the government has gotten rid of the MAC 10, Tec 9, Galil and the Uzi along with the AK 47. I could name you a whole list, but here is the bottom line: Regardless of which brand names of firearms that have been eliminated, the left is NEVER satisfied. Adding insult to injury the government passed a so - called "assault weapons ban" and it was in effect for TEN YEARS before coming back up for a vote that would have made it permanent. So, for ten years we tried this out and it didn't work. You had a sitting president that was willing to sign the law and make it permanent, but the facts got in the way. The law did not do what it was intended to do. It failed. So, having compromised with the left and trying it their way, they owe it to the right to compromise with them and have the right offer some legislation that would reduce gun deaths. Unfortunately, the right cannot hear me. And they are led by dullards that don't give a rat's ass about this country. What I'm saying is that there has to be a grass roots level effort to put my ideas on the table and force the powers that be to consider them.
The left's idle chatter about so - called "common sense gun laws" that are unconstitutional will not be implemented in my lifetime. LONG AFTER I'm dead and gone, Americans will have firearms. If the left gives a rip about innocent lives, they will want to save those lives regardless of the gun laws. But, they don't. I know it and you know it. The argument is about gun control - specifically control.
|
|
professorx
Global Moderator
Site Administrator
Posts: 413
|
Post by professorx on May 30, 2023 2:52:35 GMT
Wow. You've done seven posts without any feedback. If you weren't on the money I would continue to ignore this thread. At your insistence the ND thread has been read and you have this as the feedback sought. The left democrats whatever they want to be called have made a religion out of hating guns. They cannot associate freedom with guns. You made a good point. The common denominator between a dui death is the alcohol and the car. If you ban cars then you would not have to worry about dui. That makes sense.
It was amazing to see the left making accusations of name calling and rudeness while never answering a single question asked of them. Keep up the fight. The left is losing over there and their arguments are now defeated. That sociopath or social engineer whatever she is was triggered once called out on recent statistics. When asked to examine them long term the left shut down and went to something else. Since the left won't do it would it be too much to ask for you to make a list of their most common arguments for gun control and what is wrong with each of those?
|
|