Omaha contingent please check in ...

[rp2813]

Oh geez, I am really, really shaking my head now after reading Rex's post. I guess that's why I'm quite happy living in California with all the other supposed nut cases. We'll likely be the first state in the U.S. to come up with serious gun control eventually and I will gladly contribute to that cause. Anybody who needs an AK-47 to shoot a deer most certainly has physical shortcomings that he's trying to make up for. I am stunned by the suggestion that turning that mall into the OK Corral would have been the right thing to do.

I stand by my statement above that the NRA lobby is deranged. In fact, I'll go a little further now that a couple of members have chimed in, and say SERIOUSLY deranged.

RALPH

 

[~sudsshane]

Well Ralph...

It will be interesting to see if the NRA and their members will support a gun control advocate who sued gun manufacturers, Rudy Giuliani for President, should he be the nominee. For me personally, I could care less about the 2nd amendment, but I do respect people who are gun owners and their right to carry them. My father is a "card carrying member of the NRA" and has an extensive gun collection. Do I like it?, No. Do I stand by his right to own them?, Yes. Will I destroy the gun collection one day when I inherit them?..You betcha! So, with that being said, let's remember to focus on the things that unite us and not divide us.

and lastly..I am going to pose the same question to Rex, I asked of Runematic. Could you see yourself voting for pro gun control Republican Mayor Rudy Giuliani for President? Do you think the NRA will endorse him should he win the nomination?

 

[oxydolfan1]

"We'll likely be the first state in the U.S. to come up with serious gun control eventually and I will gladly contribute to that cause."

But why would we want the neocons to have all the weapons, and endorse legislation that would prevent US from arming ourselves against them?

Shane...based on what I've been reading and hearing, old Rudy appears to be dead in the water. What we have known for years seems to have penetrated throughout the nation (I'm also relieved to mention I believe we are safe from Thompson, at well)...

For evidence, I submit the media's push of Huckabee and now Romney, Huckabee, Romney....

They are as hungry to appoint an official candidate for the Republicans as they were with Hillary and the Dems...

What a bunch!

 

[rp2813]

Shane, we are on the same page. My dad had a german machine gun from WWII that he brought home as a trophy. Well, it turned out that after he died and we wanted to find a new home for the gun, a little research advised that it was an illegal weapon in California and it had never been registered. My sister and I sweated out hauling that thing between our homes as we each tried to "unload" it, as it had been valued as high as $5K and my mom could use the money. People we spoke with were afraid to even talk on the phone about it with us and would refer to it as "the item" or whatever. The logistics of getting it to an interested party just couldn't be nailed down--this thing was a major hot potato--so finally I told my mom to turn it over to a guy who is a member of my Dad's old army division and who is also a sheriff in the area. He came and got it and I really don't care what happens to it. I guess if we lived in the bible belt it would have been an easier thing to get rid of. I'm just happy it's gone, as it's "loaded" with bad karma considering that it was used to help advance Hitler's cause. As far as I'm concerned the best thing that could happen to that gun would be to get melted down and become part of a new Prius.

As for Rudy, I think the NRA will simply not endorse him should he get the nomination. So far it appears the people in Iowa prefer the preacher, and if that's the case and the media runs with it, Rudy could have some trouble ahead. Should it end up being Rudy vs Hillary, I see a replay of 2000 with a 3rd party candidate siphoning off the more conservative voters instead of the liberal ones. Bodes well for Clinton (or even Obama) and I'm sure sick and tired of the Repugnicans, in lockstep with their dangerously fearless leader, dragging this country into economic ruin.

Ralph

 

[brisnat81]

Port Arthur massacre

It's shocking when something like this happens, and my heart go out to the poor families left behind.

Back in 1996, Martin Bryant shot and killed 35 people and wounded 37 others at a tourist destination in Tasmania.

Loading…

en.wikipedia.org

The response from the federal and state govt, was that they introducted a Gun buyback scheme, and also introduced mandatory gun licenses and registration of all firearms, a near-complete ban on all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, and all pump-action shotguns. Some farmers and professional cullers could own certain semi-automatic rifles and shotguns but most licenced firearm owners (including international sports shooters) were banned from legally acquiring and owning these firearms for recreational target shooting and hunting. Automatic weapons had been banned since the 1930s.

Loading…

en.wikipedia.org

I've been a sporting shooter since I was 12, and I agree that I do enjoy target shooting, and occaisionally duck hunting. For target shooting I cant see the need for an automatic weapon, you'd just end up spraying the target, and it removes the sport of having to aim accuratly and shoot.

I think that our goverments reponse was a good measure, people can still own guns, but there is no real reason, other than for collecting, that anyone needs to own an automatic, or semi-automatic weapon with a large clip.

All this crap about protecting Americans rights, the rest of the world thinks it's an absolute joke. You cant force people to wear motorcycle helmets because its their right to choose, you cant force people to wear seatbelts, you cant have speed cameras because they're unconstitutional, its my right to drive a huge SUV, I have a right to cheap fuel prices, I have a right to have it all now. I was reading an article this week at www.safetysells.org, so much time and money was wasted in trying to devise passive safety systems in cars (IE Passive because the occupant doesnt have to do anything) to reduce insurance costs and to lower the road toll. Australia had mandatory seatbelt laws by 1976 and by the mid 80's 90% of people were buckling up. The US took until the late 90's because of all this crap that it would be unpopular to make wearing seatbelts mandatory. How screwed is US system when life saving decisions are based on what is popular, rather than what can save lives?

What does the US govt keep doing about the recession that the US seems to be zooming towards? They keep lowing interest rates and proping up a system that is fueled by consumerism and greed. Of course this increases inflation which keeps making the problem worse. The Reserve bank of Australia's solution to inflation, is to keep increasing Interest rates at .25% at a time in the hope of curbing spending and stopping an inflationary spiral. The US seems to have a decrease at about the same time we've had each increase. I know which ecconomy seems to be healthier at the moment.

I apologise for my rant, but all this rubbish about the second ammendment, and my right to do whatever I want, doesnt seem to ever protect the minority, only those that have very powerfull lobby groups.

If anyone wants to flame me about my response, please do so via email, rather than turning this into the usual political brawl.

Regards

Nathan

 

[rp2813]

Nathan, thank you for your enlightened post. If the unyielding NRA members shared your views I wouldn't feel the same way towards them as I currently do. Every situation has a reasonable compromise, but the NRA is fanatically, irrationally unwilling to even consider such a thing.

 

[rocketwarrior]

Er, uh, back to the shooting in Omaha for a minute

At Post # 252603 above I shared with you big gun totin' teddy bears (just funnin') some of the content of an email I received first thing the 'morning after' from one of the first officers to enter Von Maur. My friend's identity is public now and his story is on the front page of the Omaha World-Herald (if you count below the fold as front page) this morning. Here is the link if you are interested.

Loading…

www.omaha.com

 

[maggie~hamilton]

The problem with banning firearms

is that the people who reall need them, to protect themselves from evildoers, will be the only ones without them. Do you really think criminals with mayhem in mind are going to turn in their weapons when they are all banned? Most of them don't even register the ones they now have legally.

 

[rocketwarrior]

Seems like we can never quite get in tune..

I have been reading this thread. My interest is mainly that I am in Omaha and that I have a friend, yadda yadda. I also have some experience with firearms including automatic and semiautomatic firearms. I have police officer friends who are lovely people and I have been "involved" in situations where police conduct has been - we'll just say not good.

I tune in to the gun debate from time to time but haven't stayed with it with the critical detail that I allocate to other things because, frankly, I think it is a lost cause. That is, we in this country are armed to the teeth and gun manufacturer are spitting them out like popcorn. Kind of like drugs and undocumented workers, we have a huge appetite and it will be met by the market place.

So, I am kind of in agreement with CRL. The only deviation, or clarification, I would offer is that I am not convinced that the public is safer, when you net it out, by having guns in their homes. There is too much danger that they will shoot themselves, their kids will shoot their friends, a kid will take it to school, the guns won't be locked up, guns will be stolen and used in crime - the list goes on.

And then you get to hear the words, "I didn't know it was loaded." Now, in my simplistic view of life I think not knowing whether a firearm is loaded or not is a greater offense than discharging the weapon. And if I had my way it would be a law that the person standing closest to the speaker of the words "I didn't know it was loaded" would be required to slap that idiot silly and then pass him to the next closest person for another pummeling ad infinitum.

 

[rocketwarrior]

Assault Rifles

Regarding assault weapons. I understand the claim that the second amendment may give civilians the right to own assault weapons. I also understand the rush of how they feel, the sound, the smell. It can be trippy. I still don’t think that civilians should have them and I cringe when I hear civilians try to glorify them. And I despair that manufacturers keep handing them to people who have no business being anywhere near them. People tend to use them like a sport drug and leave them in a closet to the ready fascination of messed up people.

I have, and I will, pick one up, if asked, to defend my country in an official, sanctioned capacity. Otherwise I will try to stay as far away from them as I can. And my respectful request is that civilians refrain from the exercise of their right to have them around. No good can come of that.

 

[tolivac]

I am not endorsing the AK for deerhunting-but just saying it can be possible.There are better rifles for that task.I do have some AK variants and enjoy shooting them.Other folks I know like using theirs too.I don't like seeing any gun misused-but banning them is fruitless-its not going to solve the problem any more than banning cars is going to solve drunk driving.If Mr Hawkins did have mental problems He SHOULD NOT have been released from the institution until it can be proven he can function correctly in public.The guns ARE NOT the problem--remember a gun is a device just like a car,appliance,chain saw,lawnmower-or anything elese that can be hazardous we use everyday.Keep in mind Mr Hawkins could have sped into that mall in a car hitting people with it and killing them.Any car has more destructive force than any "assault rifle"ever made.Yet there is no movement to ban them?Same with SUV's-some clown out near Raleigh some time back mowed down many people in a rented SUV .And yes I feel far safer in an area that has little restrictions on guns than trying to ban them.that is why I left the Wash DC area-downtown DC is like a slaughterhouse-innocent people are being killed and hurt by those "banned" guns criminals have and use at will there.One night after leaving my workplace in downtown DC I heard more gunshots-and had to hit the deck-than what I experience out here at the transmitter during hunting season.and I have seen the hunters carrying SKS rifles-an AK variant.Should Mr Hawkins stepfather be held responsible for letting him get the rifle he used at that mall?The stepfather was irresponsible for leaving the weapon loaded and where someone like Robert could get a hold of it.It should have been stored locked up and unloaded.I don't see anyting sinister about AK's or AR15's as some people do-they are a another rifle to me.And keep in mind these can shoot a large number of rounds-but loading those magazines takes time-several minutes.

 

[rocketwarrior]

I understand

Rex, like I mentioned above, I really think the 2nd Amendment debate is a waste of time and therefore have not even bothered to challenge some of the statistical claims. I truly doubt that, except in the hands of law enforcement, there is reliable data that more people have been helped by lawful gun ownership than have been harmed by the inevitalbe result of negligent lawful gun ownership. It seems like for most inner city type shootings the gun was acquired easily because "lawful" owners let them get away. The so-called good guys are negligently arming the bad guys. Even dealers are sloppy. In Omaha, a store was broken into (and break-ins happen regularly - we are on notice) and they walked out with an arsenal of weapons that were not locked up. Well, technically, the front door was locked. You see, that's not good enough.

My real beef is the negligent way so many "lawful" owners handle their weapons. Too many are not well trained, do not lock their weapons, etc. And that is actually where the NRA could be quite helpful. For example, the NRA could be much more involved in doing something about the negligence. The NRA could, with its politcal power, make so much noise that noone would ever think to utter those lame, irresponsible, mindless words, "I didn't know it was loaded."
I think we should raise the standard of responsible ownership.

But, again, the cause is lost. Anti gun ownership (and even anti gun negligence) is like prohibition, there would be more blood in the streets because the veracious appetite of our consumers will be satisfied.

 

[tolivac]

Needless to say if you own the weapon or have proper acess to it you should know how to check if its loaded-you should know how to remove the magazine from the gun and how to clear the chamber of the last cartridge.In the case of revolvers-how to open the cylinder to unload the gun.When you purchase the weapon-have the dealer show you how to do the unloading-loading operations-and practice it until you know it by heart.And read the owners manual cover-to-cover.NRA does offer EXCELLENT training on how to make safe all types of firearms.Fortunately with revolvers its easy to see if the gun is loaded-you will see the cartridges in the chambers.And on other weapons know how the safety works--and most important-TREAT EVERY FIREARM YOU ENCOUNTER AS LOADED until you or its owner has checked and cleared it.You must unload and open the chamber of any gun before passing it to another person.Then the both of you see that its safe.And watch where you point the muzzle.Don't allow it to point at other persons.

 

[rocketwarrior]

Wash. D.C.

Rex,
Omaha is dealing with inner city shootings. (Actually, 'dealing with it' is incorrect.) Let me start again. Omaha is experiencing inner city shootings and I am tuning in to the discussion. In a post above, you stated "...that is why I left the Wash DC area-downtown DC is like a slaughterhouse-innocent people are being killed and hurt by those "banned" guns criminals have and use at will there." Can you give me some examples of what was/is happening and how it affected you? I mean, our innner city shootings seem to be any old weapon that comes along and the biggest thing that bugs me (othere than how they were armed) is that uninvolved people encounter stray ammo.

 

[~sudsshane]

So...Rex, still waiting to hear your thoughts on Pro Gun Control Republican Mayor/Presidential Candidate, Rudy Giuliani..

 

[tolivac]

DC-There is a bullet pockmark on the building outside wall where I work.A drug deal gone bad?Who knows-What I was trying to say is that Wash DC banned the posession of handguns by people living in that town or going there.Well the law HASN'T worked-crime was rampant there at the time-500 people killed per year-and 30 in one night from a gangfight.In the Greenville NC area-less than 30 get killed per year.On that night I was leaving from work-a 4-mid shift.There was some shooting down the street and it sounded awfully close-so I "hit the deck"it was while I was waiting for a bus.I have never encountered "stray ammo"don't know what this means unless you dodged a stray bullet.Yes-gangs and crooks will use any gun thay can find-but not always-they don't want to use rifles-assault or otherwise-because it does take some skill to hit with a rifle unless you are point blank.And the rifle is larger and heavier.-and more difficult to conceal.From that night on I heard the gunfire in downtown DC-I waited in the building until my bus came.
As far as Rudy Giulinai he will need to change his stance on the gun control before he can get nominated.I will not vote for him.Same with McCain.I don't like "Rino" candidates.They are more like Democrats than Republicans.
the part that really bothred me about DC's stupid laws is that innocents were "disarmed"but crooks had and were freely using guns.And at the time some DC folks were saying how safe DC was when at the time(late 90's) it was the most dangerous city in the nation as far as crime was concerned-the "crime capitol of the Nation"Showed the folly of their mayors FAILED gun laws.Now there is a process to get it overturned.Hope its succesful in the overturning.It was a bad law.

 

[rocketwarrior]

Inner city shootings, an imperfect solution...

In Omaha, we get x amount of wanton shootings and then there is an outcry. Our leaders grab a couple of community/church leaders with hard hats and shiny shovels and claim they are going to develop some miserable plot of real estate. No improvement comes from it, of course, because there is no underlying demographic to support whatever they build.

And if it gets bad enough, those guys with berets come to town and march in the street with community/church leaders and try to “rescue” “youth” from gangs for a few days while the press is watching. Of course this doesn’t amount to anything because there is no underlying demographic to support it.

And our local newspaper “deals” with the problem by proclaiming there are too many single parent families, not recognizing that if there were a two parent family up there they would figure out a way to get the heck out.

I believe the medical term for this approach to solving inner city problems is “circle jerk.” I don’t think our leaders have the slightest clue about how to solve the problem.

But I believe that fewer innocent (my son corrected me this weekend and suggested I substitute “uninvolved” for “innocent” – that seems fair) – I believe that fewer uninvolved people would be shot if those guys with the berets, instead of marching around with those nice boots and thinking they can talk people out of gang involvement, would instead train them to shoot and to handle weapons. It is hard enough as it is for people to hit what they are shooting at with a handgun. And when they acquire the weapons illegally, they have no system for training.

So, if the beret guys would hold clinics teaching gang members basic handling of weapons, and plenty of target practice, I am willing to bet that the number of uninvolved people being hurt would drop significantly. I mean, no baby should die because some clown couldn’t hit a competing gang member.

And, lest there be protest, I am not advocating the promotion of the extermination, from within, of any group. I am just saying that if it is a choice between a baby or a drug dealer, and one is going to die no matter what we do, then, let’s save the baby. It is not a perfect solution, but what is?

 

[tolivac]

Gangs and youth-there are some things that can be tried-give the kids something else to do.Provide some sort of receational center they can go to after school or whatever.and the parents should get involved in activities and hobbies with their children.And yes-shooting is an excellent hobby for the parents and the child to try.children do have a fascination with guns-I did as a kid and grew up with guns my Dad owned-the day came to teach me how to shoot!I was excited-and tried it-was fun!Guns don't always have to be used for "violent" purposes.And of course the myrid of other hobbies and sports the parents and kids could do.
Also the city or community leaders should do things to discourage gang activities-they are illegal and dangerous.Clean up ANY and EVERY gang graffitti on comunity surfaces such as signs,buildings,bridges,etc.Have the Police and community watches patrol neighborhoods to look out for gangs.Yes,teach the kids to shoot but NOT for violent things such as gangs.And discourage video-computer games and such that encourage violent activity.It was found the participants in the Columbine shootings were playing some sort of video game portraying the player as someone going thru a school and shooting students and school staff for points.Such programs should go right to the SHREDDER!Lets find something else for the kids to do-and by the way?do schools still assign the students HOMEWORK?Perhaps that will keep them out of trouble.I feel parents should just get more involved with their children and what they do.

 

[rocketwarrior]

Good Ideas

Rex,
Your ideas are good. You ideas were tried. That is what I mean about guys with hard hats and shiny shovels. They do the rec center thing, etc. But there is no underlying demographic to support the effort. You can't solve the problems by saying 'parents should'. Saying that does not make it happen. We have whole subcultures where the young males are unemployable. Single parent households, single grandparent households. Welfare, trash, joblessness, violence. We are so far into it that these young men cannot see any role model anywhere. The vision is dismal. The only "nurturing" he gets is from the gangs. His dad is gone. His mom on crack. His grandmother just hanging on with a place to live -- maybe. Really, you gotta get up here and see this -- but I suspect it it the same in DC, etc.

I breakfasted with a "consultant" from Chicago the other day regarding these issues. He is here to help with an inner city development project. I told him that part of my frustration was that it seems like we are trying to invent the wheel. This is Omaha. Haven't many cities been through this so instead of inventing the wheel we can use another model. His answer was pretty depressing. He said there are no helpful models of success. Like I said, you can throw all of the good ideas you want at the problem but without an underlying demographic of support and jobs - the ideas are doomed.

My firm, working with an inner city high school, is trying to rescue an individual caught up in one of those non families. So far, so good. I really think we will get this kid out of it. But it is one on one and every day. It requires real commitment. But our effort is a drop in the bucket and will not solve the problem.

 

[tolivac]

Many of the things I suggested seem to work in the Greenville,NC area-gang activities here have been suppressed.Its not perfect but safer than DC and many other places.The law enforcement here cracks down on gang things pretty quickly.Same with drugs-lots of busts here.The Sheriff and Police depts don't put up with those things here.Not to long ago some downtown gang "hangouts" were torn down.Old abandoned homes.Now they are forced to go somewhere else.Next is get rid of the drugs and the demand for them.why do folks want to trash their minds and bodies with these?Never could understand-when there are so many other things to do!Like appliances!