companyinkrecs Posted January 8, 2013 Author Share Posted January 8, 2013 He would've been better served to push the pharmaceutical angle calmly, It was actually quite compelling. But it seems that almost every pro-gun party (lobbyist or not) is focused on their unwillingness to entertain the idea of making it more difficult to get this specific category of assault weapons that everyone is talking about, as if it somehow that makes them concede their entire set of 2nd amendment principles. This claim that the government will take your rocks and knives and baseball bats next is just a goofy talking point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerseydave77 Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 Narrowing this entire debate around mass shootings and assault weapons is such an error. So few gun related deaths are the result of these mass tragedies. So many crimes of passion, suicides and accidents can be prevented and need to be. The availability of the weapons however is a reality. There are something like 300 Million firearms in America - I have said for years that the strategy of the NRA and manufacturers has been to put so many firearms out there that the only solution to the ensuing violence stemming from easy availability is more guns/conceal carry. The Cato Institute issued a statement essentially saying that with so many guns out there we need accept being a Gun Nation and now discuss how to keep them out of the hands of the mentally ill. This is what these neo-cons wanted. Any legislation regarding assault weapons that doesn't also include a mandatory buy back is toothless and pointless. This is a huge mess and is going to get messier before anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuzzersonKillwell Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 We have a pretty high homicide rate per capita, but we have a really low rate of gun owner to violent offender. I think gun violence the symptom of a larger, much harder to address cultural problem. There are a lot of ways to harm people. I'm not a gun owner, and I'm in favor of making them much more difficult to acquire, but personally I'm not sure any type of ban is the answer. EDIT: Just watched the video. That dude is unhinged. Someone should maybe put his guns in timeout for a little bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamover Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 He also does a good British Stewie accent. fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamover Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I loved his point of there being less gun murder in the UK than in the US. Well no shit, more people usually equals more opportunity for anything to happen. 35 vs. 11,000 isn't exactly an equal ratio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonnywreck Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 35 vs. 11,000 isn't exactly an equal ratio. Though, when violent crimes are factored in, it levels out the playing field. Guns or not, people will always find a way to kill and destroy. Bombs, knives, bats... anything could be used. The fact of the matter is not gun control but our health care system. (serious time) - I was committed to a psychiatric ward for five days. During these five days every doctor failed to realize that I was simply having a nervous breakdown and instead diagnosed me with paranoid schizophrenia and/or bipolar disorder while pumping me full of a drug called Seroquel. It became increasingly clear to me that I did not belong there as I watched several patients kick heroin cold turkey and deal with hallucinations. Most of the people were just depressed and made the mistake of saying that they wanted to kill themselves or that they wanted to die (like me). That's right, in an attempt to save money, the hospital coupled up addicts with mental patients and ordinary people and treated them all alike. EVERYONE was put on Seroquel, and the dosage was upped if a patient became upset. Many people don't realize how hard it is to "keep your cool" when you are being held against your own will. To add to the situation, whenever my assigned "doctor" came to speak to me, she would never listen to what I had to say and instead baited me by calling me crazy and trying to get me to confess to being crazy. The doctor finally consented to release me if I promised to visit her. I went to visit her and she said I "needed to pay the hospital bills (which came out to around 10,000 dollars) before I could continue session with her." I opted to visit an old counselor I had visited a few years ago, who immediately recognized my exhaustion, and insisted that I discontinue the use of medication and to never see that damn "doctor" again. Does this sound like a proper treatment for any of the individuals involved? This is the state of health care that needs to be reformed. If every hospital is run like this, there's no wonder that mental patients are flying off the deep end. It's the big pharmaceutical companies that need to be regulated. How is it that addicts, mental patients, and the like are all treated with the same drug? Maybe I'm just ranting, but I really think that the focus on this situation needs to be put on the issue of mental health care and psychiatric meds and not on the guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamover Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 There are MASSIVE issues with how we treat mental health patients. Your situation is a great example of one of the many things that's wrong with our healthcare policies. People who are depressed shouldn't not be treated like schizophrenics. Hospitals are run like businesses, not as public services. There are more incentives to sell than incentives to treat. It is impossible for people to understand that there is more than one issue at fault here. It's impossible to argue that if this child had proper treatment (whatever that is), this crisis could've been potentially avoided. It is also impossible to argue that if he was armed with a knife or even a handgun instead of the gun he used, less children may have died. It shouldn't be an all or nothing debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonnywreck Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I wasn't meaning for it to be an all or nothing statement, sorry if it came off that way. I was just implying that the focus needs to be shifted to mental health. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I wasn't meaning for it to be an all or nothing statement, sorry if it came off that way. I was just implying that the focus needs to be shifted to mental health. And it will never happen. So much more money is invested in the pharmaceutical companies,, much much more than in guns. They are pushing enough money to make sure that it is never brought to the forefront as it should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamover Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I wasn't meaning for it to be an all or nothing statement, sorry if it came off that way. I was just implying that the focus needs to be shifted to mental health. i wasn't arguing with you. i totally agree with you. proponents, but more so opponents to gun control keep making it an all or nothing argument. "if this deranged individual had knives instead, he would've still killed people, so there's no point to changing anything". the arguments of these insane gun advocates' (who do not represent the whole of the conservative right) arguments are really starting to unravel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trevorxramage Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 I loved his point of there being less gun murder in the UK than in the US. Well no shit, more people usually equals more opportunity for anything to happen. US population is roughly 315, 085, 000. UK population is 63, 181, 775. That makes the US population five times that of the UK. Using the statistics provided in that video clip 35 gun related deaths in the UK times 5 is 175. You're argument has no validity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trevorxramage Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 My two cents, the smaller and less dangerous the weapon the more chance the victims stand of defending themselves from the attack. To say that eliminating assault rifles would only lead more stabbings is ridiculous. Last time I checked you couldn't stand at the door of a classroom and stab every person inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 US population is roughly 315, 085, 000. UK population is 63, 181, 775. That makes the US population five times that of the UK. Using the statistics provided in that video clip 35 gun related deaths in the UK times 5 is 175. You're argument has no validity. I wasnt necessarily trying to argue anything. I didnt remember the numbers of crimes in UK with guns, I knew it was substantially lower and didnt make up the difference in population, but to say that without mentioning a population size difference is erroneous. Both men have valid points, and both men shit all over their points trying to pander to the lowest common denominator out of their camp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trevorxramage Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 but to say that without mentioning a population size difference is erroneous. If the population made it even remotely close I could see including it. The fact is it doesn't matter even a little bit. If anything including the population difference would have been a stronger point for piers to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuzzersonKillwell Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Both men have valid points, and both men shit all over their points trying to pander to the lowest common denominator out of their camp. U.S. Politics in a nutshell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daegor Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 His underlying point is a valid one though I am far from an Alex Jones fan. There is reason to investigate if there is in fact a connection between these anti-depressants and the mania we see in those that engage in these rampages. What is not said is that maybe it is best to make it harder to keep firearms away from the mentally ill or disturbed in general. This is what is dumb about people who freak out while trying to make a point. When you loose your shit you completely discredit ANYTHING you are trying to say. I caught that amongst his verbal diarrhea too, and it IS a good point (though somewhat irrelevant to the "discussion"). The even sadder thing is that I'm sure he DID gain followers due to that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piecemeal Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 For Alex Jones it's all about hits ($$$) and followers, both on Twitter and just straight up kool-aid drinkers. They both knew what would happen ahead of time, he didn't lose his shit, this was carefully planned. This increases ratings, gets Piers and Alex trending, making them both relevant, and for Alex at least, that's his goal. (Alex is getting serious mileage out of this he recently tweeted "If they kill me, I was murdered.") I love Alex and his entertainment value, and I also believe he is a patriot. He goes to places with his conspiracy stuff that no one else does. I can rest assured that at least someone is going there, and fighting the good fight against the Military-Industrial Complex, the true enemy of the people. As Joe Rogan always points out, he's right about 70% of the shit he says, and the other 30% is just bat-shit crazy. It's kind of like Ancient Aliens, most all of it is nonsense but at least someone is thinking outside the box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.