Leadership

[_Markk]

Markk are you still trying to demonstrate just how much of an obtuse moron you really are on this subject?

If so, mission accomplished.

LOL...Merry Christmas to you too.

[_canpakes]

One thing is certain: NRA types never want to talk about gun deaths. They want to talk about gun deaths AND. As in, gun deaths and drugs, gun deaths and alcohol, guns deaths and crime, gun deaths and poverty, gun deaths and ANYTHING other than gun deaths themselves. Much easier to make a bad point when you muddy up the water.

Virtually every Republican at the debate last night got up and said the first job of the President of the United States is to protect the American people.



Again and again and again, President Obama calls for rational gun control, but the very same Republicans, who last night swore up and down their solemn oath to protect the American people, cash their campaign contributions from the N.R.A.

If the terrorist could rack up half the deaths gun homicides in this country, I guarantee you people would be talking about using nuclear weapons in the middle east. But as long as it's real Americans killing each other with real American bullets, THAT'S American exceptionalism.

Again, look at the graph and remember that, according to virtually every Republican candidate last night, the first job of the President of the United States is to protect the American people.

Then by your spin we should outlaw alcohol? The USA has about 4 death from alcohol per 1000, where many countries have basically zero, or less than 1% per thousand. Should I use Niger or Pakistan as you do England and Australia as a example in deaths and laws in other countries?

There are certain things a free society chooses to live with. We like our guns, our alcohol, tobacco and Big Macs.

Talk about irony...democrats want to outlaw Cheetos and soda, and yet booze gets a free ride, and gun kill far less than bad food and booze?

Honestly...do do you want all guns outlawed, do you own guns?

This is the only handgun I've ever owned:



A friend of my father gave me a .22 rifle for my 13th birthday, but I only took it to a shooting range once. I honestly don't remember what happened to it. I think my father gave it away when we moved. Other than that, I shot a friend's handgun in the woods one time. That's about it.

I don't want to ban guns. If you want to own a rifle and a shotgun and a handgun, I've got no problem with that. I think gun owners should have to pass a safety test and be licensed.

So anyway, we're back to the gunsANDarguments. This time it's guns AND alcohol. We tried banning alcohol, didn't work out too well. So we licensed it and controlled it. Still not perfect. Tightened up blood alcohol levels in DUI laws. Toughened DUI penalties. Toughened penalties for sales to minors. The United States tries to control alcohol consumption, not ban it. We are no longer a nation of Carrie Nations.

Imagine if there were a group called the National Rotgut Association, who fought every attempt lower the blood alcohol level for drunk driving by shrilling declaring any legislation was the thin edge of the wedge to ban alcohol. The N.R.A. further argued that drinking and driving is what we do in a free society, and we should be getting tough on Vehicular Manslaughter, not drunk driving. Now imagine that group of 'independent drinkers' received tens of millions of dollars from distillers.

Last year a gun store owner in Maryland wanted to sell a smart gun that could only be fired by its owner. He received death threats. This is the level of irrational fear that permeates the gun culture in the United States. This gun wasn't being proposed as a replacement for current handguns, but as an alternative. But even the freedom to sell a potentially safer gun is subject to death threats in the gun culture of the United States.

American exceptionalism: The only nation on Earth where a gun store owner's biggest threat comes from people who own guns.

There are many nations on earth that do better with alcohol, and there are many that do worse. But there are no developed Western Nations that do as abysmally as we do with gun homicides. Most developed Western nations have rational gun control laws with much lower gun homicide rates.



And yes, Markk, obesity probably kills more Americans than gun homicides. But no one ever died from someone throwing a bacon cheeseburger at them. If someone else eats a fried stick of butter, my cholesterol level doesn't go up. There's a difference between slowly clogging your own arteries and homicide.

Just gotta say that I appreciate that excellent points were made in this post while sprinkled with a dash of humor. Thanks, MdO.

[_Themis]

What about semi automatic weapons, large clips etc? If you are concerned only about safety, then those things should not really matter?

Obviously you know safety is not the only concern.

And we will never agree that it is the guns fault on day to day homicide, it is a class and heart issue. There has always been, and will always be bad people who abuse the rights of others.

Sure and we should take steps to lessen the threat saving some lives.

Gun owners over all are really responsible people, I was taught how to handle and store weapons from a early age by my father and NRA classes, and a hunting class. All my brothers were to. Mt oldest brother was a gunners mate in Vietnam, cleaned his weapons there daily for his tours, and he came home and was showing a friend a 45, and blew a hole in the ceiling. Point being accidents will always happen.

Many don't have good training or any training at all. You need a standard that everyone who want to be a gun owner gets. This saves lives.

And I encourage gun safety, I educate folks when we go shooting. But there is a fine line there in letting the government in.

There is no fine line. This is the purpose of government, Especially in a democracy. We require licenses for many things. We don't sell certain fertilizer that is almost all used for non-lethal uses. You have to have a license and show you have approved need for it. We license people if they want to drive a car. This is what Government is for.

Swimming pools and other accidents kill far more children than gun accidents, and you have to take a safety course to drive?

Cars and guns are very dangerous tools, so yes people should require a safety courses and license. Pretty reasonable. Most pools have life guards at pools to significantly reduce the threat. Many are legally required.

Exactly why we can not compare our problems with other countries? Thank you

Bad people are using a open border, and under enforced drug laws to take advantage of our freedoms? You can't have it both ways, so in order to be like Britain and Japan...what do we do about Mexico?

better Gun control to lesson the number of guns being smuggled from the US to Mexico. There are lots of factors and things that can be done. Many are being done. Mexico is getting better as it grows Economically, but it will be slow. Remember that Canada has a much longer and less guarded border with the US. Better gun control in the US will help saves live in all three countries.

So? We give gun safety courses to help stop accidents and domestic gun violence. How do we stop the Cartel's and drug violence with guns?

That can be an interesting thread, but it is not an argument for why gun safety courses are not a good idea to lower accidents and violence with guns.

[_Markk]

What about semi automatic weapons, large clips etc? If you are concerned only about safety, then those things should not really matter?

Obviously you know safety is not the only concern.

And we will never agree that it is the guns fault on day to day homicide, it is a class and heart issue. There has always been, and will always be bad people who abuse the rights of others.

Sure and we should take steps to lessen the threat saving some lives.

Gun owners over all are really responsible people, I was taught how to handle and store weapons from a early age by my father and NRA classes, and a hunting class. All my brothers were to. Mt oldest brother was a gunners mate in Vietnam, cleaned his weapons there daily for his tours, and he came home and was showing a friend a 45, and blew a hole in the ceiling. Point being accidents will always happen.

Many don't have good training or any training at all. You need a standard that everyone who want to be a gun owner gets. This saves lives.

And I encourage gun safety, I educate folks when we go shooting. But there is a fine line there in letting the government in.

There is no fine line. This is the purpose of government, Especially in a democracy. We require licenses for many things. We don't sell certain fertilizer that is almost all used for non-lethal uses. You have to have a license and show you have approved need for it. We license people if they want to drive a car. This is what Government is for.

Swimming pools and other accidents kill far more children than gun accidents, and you have to take a safety course to drive?

Cars and guns are very dangerous tools, so yes people should require a safety courses and license. Pretty reasonable. Most pools have life guards at pools to significantly reduce the threat. Many are legally required.

Exactly why we can not compare our problems with other countries? Thank you

Bad people are using a open border, and under enforced drug laws to take advantage of our freedoms? You can't have it both ways, so in order to be like Britain and Japan...what do we do about Mexico?

better Gun control to lesson the number of guns being smuggled from the US to Mexico. There are lots of factors and things that can be done. Many are being done. Mexico is getting better as it grows Economically, but it will be slow. Remember that Canada has a much longer and less guarded border with the US. Better gun control in the US will help saves live in all three countries.

So? We give gun safety courses to help stop accidents and domestic gun violence. How do we stop the Cartel's and drug violence with guns?

That can be an interesting thread, but it is not an argument for why gun safety courses are not a good idea to lower accidents and violence with guns.

It is funny how point change, and points are are dodged.

What would Canada or the UK do, or be like if they had the open border with Mexico? You are comparing apple to oranges.

[_The CCC]

It is funny how point change, and points are are dodged.

What would Canada or the UK do, or be like if they had the open border with Mexico? You are comparing apple to oranges.[/quote]

It is US gun runners sending guns to Mexico not the other way around.

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Markk!

What say you?

Leadership comes in many forms. Some lead by example - some lead with a lot of action and mostly silence - some lead by a lot of talk and little action - some are really followers but wear a mask of leadership - and some are really leaders but wear the mask of a follower.

To be a good leader one must speak for all people - they must have the courage to stand for all people - they must have the character and strength to do what is right in the face of outside pressures.

Unfortunately, politics (including the political office that we call the President of the United States) is littered with party line loyalty, corruption, power seeking, egos, bias, control, and deep seated hatred for the people who are not in their particular party. This hatred is not only getting worse, it is responsible for the great majority of division we see in this country and it is also responsible for the overwhelming ineptness we see throughout out government. Under this scenario, true leadership is a very rare thing.

So, given this very unfortunate set of circumstances, where can leadership be found?

in my opinion - It can be found in abundance in the private sector. It can be found from people who encourage people to follow them by inspiring them. It can be found from people who have earned the trust of those that follow. It can be found from people who have done what they said they were going to do. It can be found from people who unite people for the good of all. It can be found in people who actually and honestly are willing to make a personal sacrifice so that others will benefit.

Obama (just like the last several Presidents) are not leaders. They are puppets. They owe their political successes - in large part - to many organizations, groups, and people who helped them to "win" their powerful position. This sets a "leader" up in a very tough position. They feel that they owe these organizations, groups, and individual people something (and they actually do). So given this starting position that they are placed in, how much could they possibly lead? How can anyone lead without feeling an allegiance and loyalty to certain camps?

It is very hard and that is precisely why it is such a rare thing in politics of today.

Just my take!

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Themis]

It is funny how point change, and points are are dodged.

What would Canada or the UK do, or be like if they had the open border with Mexico? You are comparing apple to oranges.

It depends on what you are comparing. Reality is you don't want to make reasonable comparisons to protect poor gun control. Mexico is not where the US's gun problem comes from. Canada being next to Mexico would not create a major gun problem in Canada. Some of Canada's gun problems come from the US. Sure Canada would have more illegals coming across for work, but you do know that they actually break the law less often then the general public. I suppose they have more reasons to avoid authorities. So when it comes to guns there is no apples to oranges. The US's gun problem is of it's own making.

[_Markk]

It is funny how point change, and points are are dodged.

What would Canada or the UK do, or be like if they had the open border with Mexico? You are comparing apple to oranges.

It depends on what you are comparing. Reality is you don't want to make reasonable comparisons to protect poor gun control. Mexico is not where the US's gun problem comes from. Canada being next to Mexico would not create a major gun problem in Canada. Some of Canada's gun problems come from the US. Sure Canada would have more illegals coming across for work, but you do know that they actually break the law less often then the general public. I suppose they have more reasons to avoid authorities. So when it comes to guns there is no apples to oranges. The US's gun problem is of it's own making.

LoL...you act as if there is not a human factor to a gun killing someone, by your understanding we already have smart guns, in that they are doing the killing, not the people?

Go live in TJ for a year and then make this assertion. You simply have absolutely now idea what you are saying. May I ask where you live? Do you know that there is major drug cartels that abuse our borders?


Freedom to own guns is not a problem, drugs, alcohol and criminals are. This is the fundamental difference in our view on this you blame the gun, I blame bad people that use them.

[_Themis]

LoL...you act as if there is not a human factor to a gun killing someone, by your understanding we already have smart guns, in that they are doing the killing, not the people?

I have already mentioned other factors several times but you don't seem interested to acknowledge it.

Go live in TJ for a year and then make this assertion. You simply have absolutely now idea what you are saying. May I ask where you live? Do you know that there is major drug cartels that abuse our borders?

I'm well aware of the drug cartels. It's not relevant to how good gun laws can make a difference because of human factors.

Freedom to own guns is not a problem, drugs, alcohol and criminals are. This is the fundamental difference in our view on this you blame the gun, I blame bad people that use them.

We are not really discussing freedom to own guns, but good gun laws. You have all the freedom to own a car, but you still need a license to drive them on public roads. How does a license requirement take away your right to own a gun. Should those Americans who are part of the drug cartel and have extensive criminal records have the freedom to own a gun?

[_Markk]

I have already mentioned other factors several times but you don't seem interested to acknowledge it.

You are all over the place themis? and your position is changing.

I'm well aware of the drug cartels. It's not relevant to how good gun laws can make a difference because of human factors.

we were talking about borders and crime, and criminals? who do not follow laws?

We are not really discussing freedom to own guns, but good gun laws. You have all the freedom to own a car, but you still need a license to drive them on public roads. How does a license requirement take away your right to own a gun. Should those Americans who are part of the drug cartel and have extensive criminal records have the freedom to own a gun?

we have the freedom to own a car, and car accidents far exceed gun accidents, it is not even close.

because a license does not stop criminal from owning guns anymore than the laws saying you have to have a license to drive a car keeps people from driving without a license. bad people do not follow laws.

no, people with extensive criminal records should not have the freedom to own guns, and that is why we have laws that forbid people with extensive criminal records to own guns, they are called felons, and possession is a mandatory prison sentence, that all to often is suspended.

by your own logic, should people with extensive criminal records be allowed to drive? after all your assertion is about safety? felons can in most cases drive.