Alex Jones (Gun Thread)

[PatsyCline]

Did anyone watch Piers Morgan last night on CNN? One of his guests was Alex Jones. They were discussing gun laws and Jones was taking the pro gun point. Any reactions to the show?

[Rockpup]

Yes, while I am highly annoyed with Piers recently I feel Alex Jones was a horrific example of someone who wants to protect gun rights. He's a bit of a nut. I think a good move toward reducing gun violence would be to go after the last known purchaser of any firearm used in a crime. This will reduce the number of "straw man" purchases, aka "the gun show loophole", where people can buy guns from individuals with no background checks. My brothers father in law would only sell a gun to someone if they met him at the police station for a background check. (full disclosure, I own 5 handguns, 2 semi auto rifles, 2 short barrel rifles, one bolt action "sniper rifle", a machine gun, and 6 silencers, all legal and owned within ATF guidelines) Also, I suspect I know which direction this will go here due to a previous discussion I had here.

[PatsyCline]

I don't see a problem with your guns, other than I thought it was illegal to own a machine gun, or is it older model, something historical?

[Bubba136]

I saw the interview and thought Alex Jones really did a poor job presenting the argument for gun retention. It's one thing to make a good, rational and solid case for the second amendment right to be armed without threatening civil unrest should the government arbitrarily decide to confiscate our privately owned firearms. Morgan is a twit. A first class jerk, in my opinion. I understand there is a campaign to deport him from this country. I hope it succeeds. While I understand English and European desire to criticiz everything American, I really don't believe we need some self appointed non-citizen mouthing off, interfering in" our" countries domestic arrairs. Besides, it is a well reported fact that hyperbolist Alex Jones was chosen by Morgan's producers for the interview soley because he' is a hothead and the discussion would quickly deteriorate into an angry scene, thus proving all gun rights advocates are flat out crazy and the quicker all firearms are removed from private citizens, the sooner the better. Also, in the interest of full disclosure, I also have two automatic handguns, a rifle and a couple of shotguns as well as a license to carry a concealed weapon.

Edited January 9, 2013 by Bubba136

[PatsyCline]

I agree that Jones did a terrible job representing the pro gun position. Regardless of my personal opinion, I was horrified that he would act in that matter. I can't imagine that Jones would think acting in that matter would show him in anything but a negative light. I suppose in the interest of full disclosure, my husband & I just received our concealed hangun permits. We have 2 handguns.

[ilikekicks]

To start with, Piers is NOT an objective Journalist. Hes a Globalist of the worst kind. He has an agenda and it hit the brick wall with Jones. Jones did his homework on this one. He might not have presented himself well ( he made a complete mockery or an ' ass of himself actually ) but the core things he stated were all true. Some Facts : Kids in the US are being jacked-up on some serious drugs. Prescriptions and medications huge Pharma companies ( whom sponsor Piers show/network rake in quantities of dollars from ) have all but sickened the kids of ' tomorrow '. Look at the last few shootings : Kids whom were on ' Head Medz ' at some point. But were all told its the ' guns ' that are the problem. Hmm.. Theres no guns in the UK but how many people are killed and what are the violent crime rates doing? Going up on both accounts? NAW! That has to be a lie, right? The head-med-generation isnt the problem at all, its just the guns ( sic! ) Look at the culture these kids are raised in. ' You shouldnt bully ', ' time out '.. You dont think these kids are going to grow up with some pent up anger and let it all loose in one nice burst? Really? It doesnt take a brain surgeon to sit back and say ' the pot will boil over if left on the flame too long '. I truly believe voices like Jones need to be out in the public more. I could give a crap less what ' Globalists ' or ' Progressives ' think. Heres the bottom line on why I believe such.. Patsy : "I can't imagine that Jones would think acting in that matter would show him in anything but a negative light. I suppose in the interest of full disclosure, my husband & I just received our concealed hangun permits. We have 2 handguns. " Im saying this respectfully and hopefully you will understand what Im getting at here. I would NOT post what I own on any public websites of ANY kind. Keep those things private as best as you can. In some areas, the Media is finding out whom permit holders are and posting all their information on their websites. I dont know about you, but I dont need people to know what I own and where I live to put the 2 together and come and rob my place. Rockpup : "(full disclosure, I own 5 handguns, 2 semi auto rifles, 2 short barrel rifles, one bolt action "sniper rifle", a machine gun, and 6 silencers, all legal and owned within ATF guidelines) Also, I suspect I know which direction this will go here due to a previous discussion I had here. " Im going to say I dont own anything at all. Those turkeys in the pic with Darian.. they just flew up and croaked in front of us There are 3 bills coming to the Senate in the next 2 weeks. One includes a total confiscation of all firearms. Another has ' Assault rifles and handguns '. By broadcasting you have certain things, any data-mining search engine will see this and *if* they come looking to confiscate, it wouldnt help you any. The point Jones is trying to make is very true. Its so blatantly obvious! Yet people will deny it. The theme behind ' Alex Jones ' is about the total ' erosion of liberty ' and where its all happening. I used to fly on planes/travel. I wont anymore. Why? I dont feel like being sexually assaulted nor seeing it happen to an elder woman or another citizen. The TSA has free reign to do as they please. You have no recourse after the put you over a table, throw up your skirt.. Many people have TRIED to sue those for doing such to them but they have a ' get out of jail free ' card. You wont find a single prosecution against any of those involved. Patriot ACT : You think you have any privacy anymore? Do you know its illegal to record a conversation when a police officer pulls you over and if you videotape it, you face a 5 year term felony? Such evidence is not admissible in court either. Hate Speech! What happened to ' free speech ' and equal protections under the law? The problem with all of it is.. Idiots like Piers Morgan can come here and preach all they want against the laws we have established without even being a citizen. Its one of the HUGE differences between us ' Yanks ' and Europeans. Those differences were on clear display. An even bigger difference is in that Piers is a coward whom fled his own country under legal duress whilst Jones is standing his ground on the laws we have here. If Piers doesnt like it, he can go back across the pond and see how well people there still think of him. People will say Americans are too set in ' old school ways ' and we dont think in a modern fashion. VERY TRUE! We have an established set of principles that we can modify at any given point in time *if we choose to*. It irks the hell out of the rest of the planet that we havent done such. It goes a long way back to when The U.S. was founded. What was critical to American Values at that time. Im a VERY AVID follower of the Constitution. The Constitutional Conventions, the Ratifications, The Colonial Congress.. The Original Constitution AND the one we presently have ( most people dont know that there was originally a different Constitution of the Republic ). People like John Adams insisted that the government be ' bound by fixed laws which the people have a voice in making and a right to defend '. What Alex Jones looks at is aligned to Ben Franklins theories on how this nation should be. When Franklin was leaving the Constitutional Convention a woman asked him ' Do we have a Monarchy or a Republic? ' His reply was something to the effect of " A Republic.. if we can keep it. " Jones believes the Republic is being lost. Sad part is.. from my standpoint.. hes pretty damn correct. So from one perspective, People can think Jones is a Loon. From *my* perspective, Jones has every right to say as he wishes. Piers is given a *courtesy*, not a ' right ' as the Constitution reinforces to all U.S. Citizens. What I DO know, Is Piers broke one of the INS requirements/rules of his ' Working Visa '. No folks, hes not a U.S. Citizen nor has he ever even *applied* for citizenship here. Technically speaking, its only going to take 1 phone call and he is out of here. Im not going to tell the UK how to run their country. Thats for them to decide. If Piers wants to tell me how my country should be run, I would kindly advise him that his type tried that once before and lost 13 colonies in the process. Hes not smart enough to speak of such things. -Ilk

[Heelster]

Didn't hear the program, and probably wouldn't bother given my opinion of Piers Morgan. He really needs to go home. I'm not telling anyone what I have as far as weapons. Lets just say I have decided not to get a concealed carry permit. I have no intentions of letting the government know what I own. - ILK - - I hear ya.

[Rockpup]

PatsyCline: Any machine guns made and registered after 1986 can only be purchased by police, or dealers looking to sell to police. Anything registered before 1986 is a $200 transfer from the ATF. I registered the two short barrel's myself, same tax, and the silencers I have made all have to be registered before I start building, and pay the same tax. I used a trust since the local sheriff decided he does not want to sign off on the ATF paperwork. in 2010 it took the ATF 3-4 weeks to process the paperwork, last year it took over 6 months.

[Shafted]

. I used a trust since the local sheriff decided he does not want to sign off on the ATF paperwork. in 2010 it took the ATF 3-4 weeks to process the paperwork, last year it took over 6 months.

That's because people are buying guns in record numbers. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why.

[Rockpup]

That's because people are buying guns in record numbers. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why.

shafted: the mad rush right now was not the cause for delaying NFA weapon registrations a year ago. Most people still think silencers/machine guns are illegal.

[Shafted]

shafted: the mad rush right now was not the cause for delaying NFA weapon registrations a year ago. Most people still think silencers/machine guns are illegal.

Then that leaves them dragging their feet for whatever reason.

[Rockpup]

ILK: I can understand being quiet, but half of my stuff is tracked by the ATF now anyways. Cannot cross state lines with a SBR or machine gun without ATF apptoval. Not to mention the TSA has odd reactions when I fly (amazingly, good reactions, guy at DFW said it was the most fun item he's ever checked) Also, to the media's dismay, the NFA records are confidential tax information. The ATF cannot release the info without a court order, even to police. Trust me, spent 4 hours on a sunday while a cop tried to figure out if I should be arrested for possession of a silencer at the gun range.

[ilikekicks]

My whole point is, People like Jones have a voice that needs to be heard while dung-piles like Piers have no grounds to stand on. Such speaks to the credibility of ' news ' organizations like MSNBC, CNN and others. The reason ' gun conversations ' are hard to have is quite simple. Theres only 2 real inputs and they are both hard lined ones. Theres one group whom has grown up with guns, bows, firearms and understands the responsibilities of them. They understand there are requirements and safety settings/environments. These things arent toys. Then theres another group whom have basically never even held a weapon and wishes such to be abolished. I look at things in a wider perspective and dont wish to infringe upon others. I dont want nor have any real needs for a silencer BUT.. if someone else wants one, its not of my concern, let them have it. Im not going to pre-judge the *intentions* of anyone else whom has never done anything wrong to me. THAT is the whole problem of the conversation. There are too many people out there worried about everyone else. The same people whom complained about the Patriot Act are now all for taking away the liberty of others. Its not right at all and honestly its baffling how someone could be so confused in their thinking. What I do know, right now, TRY and find certain rifles or ammo. The local stores and dealers are completely out and cannot keep an inventory. There was a 2 hour waiting time on the phone with the ATF last week for any new purchases due to the total volume of sales going on. These were for firearms that had their prices go up quite a bit in the last 3 weeks. Im waiting to see what Diane Feinsteins new bill is going to look like. It might just start something that nobody wants, but needs to happen.

[Shafted]

Despite the legislation the people who want guns will get them one way or another. Funny thing is, it might actually make it easier to acquire a gun.

[FreshinHeels]

. While I understand English and European desire to criticiz everything American,

tttt such generalization...

ps English are europeans

[PatsyCline]

Ilikekicks: my problem with Jones was how he blamed nearly everything on a conspiracy of one kind or another. The Supreme Court has already ruled that it is not a violation of the second ammendment that the government has a right to restrict some arms, which leaves the question of which 'some' arms is legal. We were in Las Vegas over Xmas and went to an indoor range and had the chance to fire some automatic weapons. It was extremely fun, but as a new gun owner, do weapons like that need to be in the hands of the public? Then there's the other side of me that says if the person is a law abiding citizen and wants to own one for the historical value or simply wants to have some fun and shoot up some tin cans, as long as they're being safe and not harming anyone, who am I to say they can't? Then there's horrific scenes like Sandy Hook and something has to be done to prevent that from ever happening again. I was watching coverage of the Aurora, CO suspect. He bought 6000 rounds of amuninition in a few weeks, 2 handguns, body armour, and an AR-15. I don't envy government officials, but something has to be done. Since Gabby Giffords was shot in Tuscon 2 years ago, there have been 11 mass shooting in this country. That is why my husband insisted that we learn to shoot so we could defend ourselves. But it scares me that I live in a country where it's becoming necessary to do that. Do we turn our schools and public areas into armed camps because we don't want to restrict some forms of firearms? One person told me that if I was that worried about it, I should get a bullet proof vest. It seems idiotic to me that I would need to buy a vest because the government can't keep firearms out of the hands of those who would cause us harm. I understand that people who buy their firearms legally only commit a fraction of the gun violence but I'm open to hear what those who are opposed propose. Unless they believe that that's the price we pay for having easy access to guns.

[Rockpup]

Ilikekicks: my problem with Jones was how he blamed nearly everything on a conspiracy of one kind or another.

This is Alex's claim to fame, and the downfall of any good point he does come up with. He -has- to tie it in to a conspiracy, and this drives off anyone who might agree, but has common sense.

We were in Las Vegas over Xmas and went to an indoor range and had the chance to fire some automatic weapons. It was extremely fun, but as a new gun owner, do weapons like that need to be in the hands of the public?

Need? No, but we also do not need cars that go have over 100hp and go over 55mph. Even though 33,000 people a year die on the highways you do not hear people screaming about the danger we put ourselves into every day we get into our cars. Why? Because this is the society we choose to live in. DUI fatalities out number all gun deaths, yet driving intoxicated is illegal in all states.

Irresponsible people will always act irresponsibly. People often use "saving the children" as their footing for any laws they want to push through, and demonize anyone who stands their ground against them. Remember 2257? The republicans waged war against online porn, using laws they claimed would protect kids to try to "clean up the internet", and claimed anyone who was against the law was for the sexual abuse of minors. Kinda reminds me of the claims anyone who is against the current push for ineffective guns laws "has blood on their hands".

From what I hear, 3/4 of all gun deaths are gang related. Over 500 last year in Chicago, even with very tight gun laws. Maybe if we were able to reduce violence on the streets the law abiding people would not feel the need to arm themselves.

But no, easier to blame movies/games/etc..

[Amanda]

I don't have a gun. I think guns are silly.

[hoverfly]

I don't see a problem with your guns, other than I thought it was illegal to own a machine gun, or is it older model, something historical?

It has never been illegal to own a fully automatic gun. However back when the Tommy machine gun was introduced in the 1920s, it was determined that there is no place for use in ranchers hands as it was a being marketed to. Therefore a heavy tax was placed on for ownership of such a weapon. Thus avoiding the issue of violating the Second Amendment. Today if you wished own a fully automatic weapon you must obtain a Class III license. This allows you to handle explosives, fully automated weapons, and heavy armaments, but this also comes at a heavy price.

The reason why American Constitution was built way it is today was the fact that some rich people determined that they do not like being pushed around, and taxed by big government (a.k.a. England). The Second Amendment in reality is to ensure the balance of power should all else has failed, from both foreign and domestic threats. Call it the oldest M.A.D.D. (Mutually Assured Deterrence and Destruction) directive.

Many people in other countries who believe they are free or free from government tyranny, in reality does not have any kind of protection whatsoever from such action occurring. If you believe a non-violent uprising against a government can happen in your country, think again this does not happen, if not is a very rarity. Development of nonlethal weapons involving energy technologies is a reality today. Microwave energy technologies make your innards feel like you are on fire, and make you run away. The Internet makes it so easy to isolate everybody from one another in just a flip of a switch. This has already happened in many countries and is set up in many other countries to isolate people from communications.

Ilikekicks: my problem with Jones was how he blamed nearly everything on a conspiracy of one kind or another.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that it is not a violation of the second ammendment that the government has a right to restrict some arms, which leaves the question of which 'some' arms is legal.

We were in Las Vegas over Xmas and went to an indoor range and had the chance to fire some automatic weapons. It was extremely fun, but as a new gun owner, do weapons like that need to be in the hands of the public?

Then there's the other side of me that says if the person is a law abiding citizen and wants to own one for the historical value or simply wants to have some fun and shoot up some tin cans, as long as they're being safe and not harming anyone, who am I to say they can't?

Then there's horrific scenes like Sandy Hook and something has to be done to prevent that from ever happening again.

I was watching coverage of the Aurora, CO suspect. He bought 6000 rounds of amuninition in a few weeks, 2 handguns, body armour, and an AR-15.

I don't envy government officials, but something has to be done.

Since Gabby Giffords was shot in Tuscon 2 years ago, there have been 11 mass shooting in this country.

That is why my husband insisted that we learn to shoot so we could defend ourselves. But it scares me that I live in a country where it's becoming necessary to do that.

Do we turn our schools and public areas into armed camps because we don't want to restrict some forms of firearms?

One person told me that if I was that worried about it, I should get a bullet proof vest. It seems idiotic to me that I would need to buy a vest because the government can't keep firearms out of the hands of those who would cause us harm.

I understand that people who buy their firearms legally only commit a fraction of the gun violence but I'm open to hear what those who are opposed propose.

Unless they believe that that's the price we pay for having easy access to guns.

First, It has not become necessary to arm or defend yourself, it has become necessary to deal with the issues of mental health and social economic conditions. Back in the 1980 the Supreme Court determined the way that mentally ill people were being detained was unconstitutional, and I personally agree. So Pres. Ronald Reagan issued an order to release all people of mental illness from the facilities. However no alternatives in dealing with the mentally ill were brought up and it has been this way ever since.

Second, increase in any kind of gun violence is obviously indicating a deterioration of social economic condition of this country. For example things were pretty bad in the 1980s, due to just as bad of an economic crisis. This is what brought on gang related cocainecrack drug wars. As the economy got better in the 90s into the early 2000's gun crime actually declined, along with a lock them up and throw away the key mentality in our judicial system. This also included those who are mentally ill who committed crimes. Lnfortunately since 2008 gun related crime is once again on the increase and our prisons are packed full. So what does this tell you? If you think about it, if there are large amount of gun violence anywhere on this planet, what has happened is that the social and economic environment has become to fail or has disintegrated.

[Rockpup]

First It has not become necessary to arm or defend yourself,

Nope, not when working in downtown Miami when I've nearly run people over to get away from someone trying to bust in a window. Can't imagine having a gun on myself in that situation again.

[hoverfly]

Nope, not when working in downtown Miami when I've nearly run people over to get away from someone trying to bust in a window. Can't imagine having a gun on myself in that situation again.

I believe that you are referring to Rodney King? Lets face it, police brutality was an issue that needed to be addressed long before you needed to drive over people. Now that everybody has an iPhone or Android it is not that easy for police to get away with thug tactics. As we saw two years ago, innocent people using iPhone and Android's recording police activities were being arrested. The General Attorney for the state of New Hampshire had to set down a mandate for the police to follow, let the people record, it is their right. However if the military gets involved than the crud has hit the fan.

[ilikekicks]

Sorry for breaking this down but.. theres several things I believe need to be answered specifically. Some of this is rather ' deep ' in its thoughts and I dont mean to be negative, but serious.

Ilikekicks: my problem with Jones was how he blamed nearly everything on a conspiracy of one kind or another.

As Rockpup stated, thats Jones claim to fame. I dont believe in a lot of what jones states but theres not much out there to dismiss some of what he has said. We can call the guy a cook, asshat or whatever we wish, but it doesnt dispute certain points he brings up.

He brings up the opposite of what a lot of people have been ' educated ' into believing. Hes not of the indoctrination type of mindset.

Hes the type of guy we would have over for dinner just to try and get him going to hear what weird things he might come up with. Call him ' entertainment ' if you wish.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that it is not a violation of the second ammendment that the government has a right to restrict some arms, which leaves the question of which 'some' arms is legal.

The Supreme Court has made many rulings. Weather or not they are ' correct ' is always debatable.

The problem we face and how others have made it to be, is ' Judicial Review ' or ' legislating from the bench '. The Highest Court in the land should have 2 answers to anything brought before them. Something is Constitutional or it is not. Theres no middle ground, no side-bet answers, just meat and potatoes. No room for wiggling or politicking.

We were in Las Vegas over Xmas and went to an indoor range and had the chance to fire some automatic weapons. It was extremely fun, but as a new gun owner, do weapons like that need to be in the hands of the public?

Weapons like that havent been in the hands of the ' general public ' since the Ban in 1934. Chicago Typewriters ( google that term ) caused a huge cry from the masses. MOST people speaking of outlawing guns doent even know such.

The problem with all of this is the terms people use. The ' Political Correctness ' of it all. An ' Assault Weapon ' is presently BANNED, lawfully. What the media and other people in their droves of idiocy fail to understand is that an Ar15 is NOT an ' Assault Weapon '. It can be converted into one with illegal parts and a machinist/armorer helping, but over the counter, it is not.

Then there's the other side of me that says if the person is a law abiding citizen and wants to own one for the historical value or simply wants to have some fun and shoot up some tin cans, as long as they're being safe and not harming anyone, who am I to say they can't?

Exactly. I dont need nor want any fully automatic weapons in my house. I have no use for them and could better spend such an investment into more usefull items. Sounding rude here, but I just bought a rocking new ' Kitchen Aid '. I dont need a machine gun! I kill people with calories and bait them in with tasty cakes!

Then there's horrific scenes like Sandy Hook and something has to be done to prevent that from ever happening again.

Whats really horrific were the scenes of FEMA camps near New Orleans. How about Waco?

What a lot of people never see and will cry rivers of foulness towards is how Governments killed some 200+ MILLION people over the last century. But woe are those ' poor school children and their families '. Its so heart wrenching thinking about a bunch of kids shredded by some madmen.. Yet in the same instance nothing is mentioned the other way. How about the kids in Iraq and Afghanistan, surely they dont experience any gun violence. Surely, they havent seen REAL ' Assault Weapons ' in use in their villages.

Some would say ' so lacking in compassion in those regards, how dare he make such a statement! '. The media promotes and tries to justify one entity of killing, yet says the other is justified. Many people do just as the media and say one is a tragedy and the other was justified.. It depends where your view is and whats ' correct '.

People need to realize that ' killing ' is just that. ' Killing '. Deaths occure. Maybe by different hands, different means or by different people with different causes. All that stated, its all the same. Life is taken in every instance. Its *never* a good thing.

I was watching coverage of the Aurora, CO suspect. He bought 6000 rounds of amuninition in a few weeks, 2 handguns, body armour, and an AR-15.

I remember, in one week, I bought a new truck ( 65,000$ ), 80 gallons of gasoline for it, 3 benches, 4 tool racks, 16 bags of basecoat plaster, 5 bags of lime, 12 5-gallon mixing pails.. etc.. It was 130,000$ when all was said and done. The guy in Colorado made a bad investment IMO.

Why spend all that money on things he was only going to use once? He would probably have had a better chance with a sawed off and bird shot/32 pellet buckshot. His firearm wouldnt have jammed ( as supposedly reported ). 5 shells from a pump action shotgun loaded with pellets will do much more damage then an AR15 with a 30 round magazine, have less chances of jamming and is more readily available/cheaper.

I dont see the media or any other sources even mentioning such on this ' witch hunt '. Theres other questions that need to be asked.

In every war the US has fought, to include Vietnam and present events, theres always a guy with a Shotgun in the platoon. Why would there be such a thing when all those REAL ' Assault ' weapons are there?

I don't envy government officials, but something has to be done.

Remember that thought!

Since Gabby Giffords was shot in Tuscon 2 years ago, there have been 11 mass shooting in this country.

That is why my husband insisted that we learn to shoot so we could defend ourselves. But it scares me that I live in a country where it's becoming necessary to do that.

Do you need to ask yourself WHY people are doing these things?

Heres how I see it. This will upset quite a few people and probably gain me some insight from others.

There are areas on this planet where people work and have half of what they earn taken from them to regulate their lives. They have all these ' free ' things and dont realize they are actually paying for something. They then justify their ' feelings ' believing they have the best for what they are paying for ( which makes their use of the word ' free ' sound idiotic to begin with as they know they are paying for these things ).

What they fail to every allow to be discussed in that they dont make decisions for themselves. They will argue till they are blue in the face mandating they live freely and live healthy and safe, they have the best of everything and life is so ducky! It doesnt get any better!

Hmm.. Lemme see here. I used to be able to choose whom my HMO was. I used to pay 2$ a gallon for gas. I used to have a dollar that was worth something. Now, I see our system moving towards one that represents what those ' impressionable ' types have and I have no question at all as to why things are getting worse here. Theres no rocket science behind it.

Do we turn our schools and public areas into armed camps because we don't want to restrict some forms of firearms?

Thats a question put into your thoughts by someone else, not from you. Above you said you allowed or believed people should make choices for themselves.

' Armed Camps '? When I was in school, fights happened. I had my ass whooped and I whooped some ass. There were never any guns pulled. A knife once in a while but usually the person pulling a knife was beat up on by EVERYBODY when that happened. There was a sense of honor ( of sorts ). There werent armed gangs of kids 13-17 years old. There were drugs. Pot, Coke, Acid ( LSD ) but none of the Synthetic stuff going around now ( theres some very potent stuff on the market today! ).

None of us were on Paxil, Ritlin or any other ' Head Medz '. We had parents whom were involved with our studies. Our parents worked jobs but always made time for us kids.

Id like to ask you : Do we need an armed campus or do we need parents whom are actually going to get involved in their children's lives and see to it their kids are raised to NOT glorify such events? To tell their kids that these reports on the media are of instances that should not happen.

I know where out nation is heading, thus I refused to have kids. It would be very unfair to bring them into the situation that I feel is going to happen in the next few years.

One person told me that if I was that worried about it, I should get a bullet proof vest. It seems idiotic to me that I would need to buy a vest because the government can't keep firearms out of the hands of those who would cause us harm.

Maybe they were speaking to you in regards to getting the vest to protect yourself from Government.

I understand that people who buy their firearms legally only commit a fraction of the gun violence but I'm open to hear what those who are opposed propose.

Unless they believe that that's the price we pay for having easy access to guns.

I dont live my life in fear of others. I dont live my life with the concern that some idiot is going to hijack a plane and kill 3000 people. I dont live my life worried that someone with serious issues is going to obtain the means to do something tragic.

I live my life in the hopes that I make good decisions and prosper from those decisions. If I fail, its of my own doing, nobody else is to blame. Its called ' responsibility '.

Everybody wants ' government ' involved. I could give you 16-20 trillion reasons why they are the most responsible and not hardly an answer in gun violence. If anything, government has sold more arms to others to do these kinds of things in other countries.. yet we are supposed to look to such an example to solve our problems here?

Above I asked ' remember that thought '.

I don't envy government officials, but something has to be done.

This is where the comments of those Alex Jones types come into play.

Maybe the Government is already doing something, as planned.

If government is not held in check, we have no liberties. Our liberties are ours until we surrender them or they are taken from us by force.

Government in the UK banned firearms. The EU has stated London/UK is the most violent place in the EU. The violent crime rates, as an ' unarmed society ' is pretty bad. Other ' armed ' countries of people like the Swiss have a very low crime rate. Theres no real explanation nor comparison for it. Being armed or unarmed makes no difference. Its more of the attitude of the individuals living there that causes the statistics to be what they are.

In the 40's and 50's , The US didnt have the drug problems it has now. There wasnt really a ' gang warfare ' problem. It was easier to obtain guns as you could have the US post office deliver them to your home.

The attitude of people in the U.S. is whats changed. Its not the guns that are the problem. ' Guns ' or ' Assault Weapons ' (sic) are just the fall-guy.

I believe that you are referring to Rodney King?

No, he wasnt. He was saying he was in his own car and someone came up to break out its windows..

Lets face it, police brutality was an issue that needed to be addressed long before you needed to drive over people. Now that everybody has an iPhone or Android it is not that easy for police to get away with thug tactics. As we saw two years ago, innocent people using iPhone and Android's recording police activities were being arrested. The General Attorney for the state of New Hampshire had to set down a mandate for the police to follow, let the people record, it is their right. However if the military gets involved than the crud has hit the fan.

Laws in most states say if your record the cops, you have committed a crime. People have been prosecuted for such. It falls under certain wire-tapping statutes.

[hoverfly]

No, he wasnt. He was saying he was in his own car and someone came up to break out its windows..

If you him will

Laws in most states say if your record the cops, you have committed a crime. People have been prosecuted for such. It falls under certain wire-tapping statutes.

Wiretap laws have been outdated for the last 20 years, there are thousands of cameras watching you every day. Bank cameras, security cameras in tunnels, intersections, highways, public areas etc. etc. When there is police activity it's generally conducted out in the public domain, therefore people are free to video record anything and everything in public. Just like when someone is taking a photo of you in public, it is only when it comes to the press or someone publishing you and your name, they must ask permission to do so.

[Rockpup]

I believe that you are referring to Rodney King?

Nope, was referring to personal experience. God bless ya if you never have to travel to rough areas for work. The rest of us do from time to time.

[meganiwish]

I'm hesitant to get embroiled in this, as it's not really my business. And, as Ilk said, opinions are rather polarised. Still, it seems it's not really a gun issue. You can legally hold a gun in the UK. (That said, the number of guns held by American friends {may I count you all friends?} is astonishing.) We've had mass shootings here and, sadly, at least one in a school. But it's a social issue, isn't it? We sadly have a growing number of young men putting knives into each other. It's already illegal (and rightly so) to stab someone, so banning knives achieves nothing. In the US it's illegal to shoot a load of people in a school. Law isn't the issue, but something is. Thew question isn't guns but 'How have we got to the point where some people feel shooting someone is appropriate.'? Or stabbing someone. There, same issue, different continents.

I used to do archery. I would reccomend anyone to read Lionel Shriver's We Need To Talk About Kevin.

PS Please don't tar us all with the same brush as Piers Morgan. He's an obnoxious twerp. I for one would be there with the feathers when you'd finished with the tarbrush.

[PatsyCline]

Laws in most states say if your record the cops, you have committed a crime. People have been prosecuted for such. It falls under certain wire-tapping statutes.

Any time those laws have been challenged, they have been struck down.

[ilikekicks]

I love Megan . If I ever visit the U.K. Im taking her out for Tea and a night of dancing!

I'm hesitant to get embroiled in this, as it's not really my business. And, as Ilk said, opinions are rather polarised. Still, it seems it's not really a gun issue.

Whats rather shocking is your from a different nation, one where there are rather harsh restrictions on things, and you can see the common sense of whats really happening.

You can legally hold a gun in the UK. (That said, the number of guns held by American friends {may I count you all friends?} is astonishing.) We've had mass shootings here and, sadly, at least one in a school.

What I think people need to look at is where these shootings are happening. ' gun free zones '. Think about that ( everyone ). I guess no guns will ever go there because its a ' gun free zone '.

I dont think those whom do these things really care about these ' zones ' nor laws as they have a trend of killing themselves before they are ever brought to trial. So , what, if any view, do they think of ' gun free zones '?

The sign might state such, and some may fall under the false belief that ' I read the sign and it says something isnt here, so it must be true! '. Total lunacy.

That sign is an invitation to a bad happening IMO.

But it's a social issue, isn't it?

Moreso then ' social ', its a moral obligation to humanity as I see it. The value of someone elses life is nothing to individuals whom would do such things.

We sadly have a growing number of young men putting knives into each other. It's already illegal (and rightly so) to stab someone, so banning knives achieves nothing. In the US it's illegal to shoot a load of people in a school. Law isn't the issue, but something is. Thew question isn't guns but 'How have we got to the point where some people feel shooting someone is appropriate.'? Or stabbing someone. There, same issue, different continents.

Your thought and perception is quite true on this. Its not the ' tools ', its the people.

Part of it ( IMO ) is the demonizing of others. In my nation right now, its a very divided culture. Its to the point where I have often wondered if I should let someone lay there and bleed out rather then help them and worry about being sued for it later. Good Samaritan laws only cover so much.

I look at whats been elected and the complete and utter disrespect from them towards the law, laws some of them helped create.. and Im supposed to respect and support these people?

Whatever happened to decency and common courtesy?

Respect was something that was EARNED when I grew up. We didnt have all these violent happenings. Now, Im told I need to respect everyone and ' get along '. F- that. If someone wants my respect, earn it! I will try my best to earn others.

I used to do archery. I would reccomend anyone to read Lionel Shriver's We Need To Talk About Kevin.

PS Please don't tar us all with the same brush as Piers Morgan. He's an obnoxious twerp. I for one would be there with the feathers when you'd finished with the tarbrush.

I apologize if you felt as if I tossed you into a certain mindset. That apology goes out to all as well.

I frequent many international websites. There are MANY places *I* wont even comment at due to the amount of outright *hatred* towards people from the U.S. and ( believe it or not ) Canada.

Any time those laws have been challenged, they have been struck down.

Check this out :

"The same government trying to pass restrictions on firearms recently tried to pass bills censoring the internet (SOPA and PIPA), passed legislation allowing for the indefinite detention of American citizens without a trial (NDAA), passed legislation making it a felony to protest at events (without receiving prior permission) where individuals receiving secret service protection are present (HR 347), and has made it a policy to assassinate American citizens without due process (in violation of the 5th amendment). Why should we surrender more rights to said institution?"

Even though a law may be struck down, do you fully believe some courts will allow ' evidence ' of taping/video to be submitted? Its up to the judge and ' their interpretation ' of the law.

If you look at the 9th Circuit in the US, its a bastion of reversals. In one year 26 of 29 cases they had to go the supreme court were overturned against the 9th circuit.

Theres supposed to be a uniformity or ' equal protection under the law ' but it varies greatly in many instances.

How is a nation supposed to settle any ' control ' debates on anything from cars to guns to internet connections when the courts arent even on par with one another?

All of the above adds up to the true concerns that were instituted as the basis for the second Amendment.

The founders of our Nation were beyond wise of their years. They lived in times when many freedoms didnt exist. Once those freedoms were won ( through Revolution ), they had many thoughts on what was to come and TRIED to cover what they deemed was to be the future. By this I dont mean the Internet, TV's, Cars.. but society.

A look at some of Thomas Jeffersons statements at the Continental Congress and Ratifications :

"When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe ."

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."

"It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world."

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government."

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."

By looking at some of the things HE said, 200 years earlier.. Step aside Nostradamus! T. Jefferson has it better then you could have ever guessed!

The Founders Lived under Tyranny and knew what it was first hand. Their sufferings are what lead us to having the liberties we do today. Instead of paying homage and reflecting on what happened with them, we go against such and institute the complete opposite. We now question why many of the bad things happen to us.

One of Jeffersons most ' missed ' sayings was his feelings on ' Central Control ' via currency.

In 1802, Jefferson stated "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.".

Have you ever heard of something more true?

We have ( rather : had ) a Republic, not a ' Democracy '. The more ' Democratic ' it becomes, the more our nation will implode. Tyranny of the majority never works and all to often has ended in revolution or some means of chaos.

I will bet someone will read that last statement as being a ' political party ' and not a process ( thats how bad things have become ).

I believe if we totally ditched the ' Public Education System ' with all of its rules and regulations, we might have a better scholastically achieved youth within a decade. Our schools arent allowed to be ' moral '. The kids of today are born into a situation of ' no tomorrow ' so they feel obligated to enjoy the present and not look towards a future.

There are how many people graduating from " Good " institutions now working at fast food places *IF* they can find a job? We need to wonder why these shootings happen when there is such disparity and shame running amuck?

[meganiwish]

Tyranny of the majority never works and all to often has ended in revolution or some means of chaos.

Hear hear

[PatsyCline]

The true test of a society is how they treat the minority.

[Shafted]

Conspiracies and conspiracy theories One only has to look at history to know that conspiracies do happen. It is very dangerous to discount the conspiracy theorists. They may be wrong, but they just as easily could be right. Alex does come off as an emotional wreck when he gets worked up. This does him a great disservice. Alex has been right about much.(Ex. He exposed the Bilderburg group when nobody knew it was going on). Alex does do something that the mainstream media never does. He provides reference material to support his stories. Materials that allow to reader to verify the legitimacy of the story. Until the mainstream media does the same thing, they provide nothing to back up their story. Who would you more likely believe?