NPR program 'On Point' covers accessibility of guns

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

grimjaw

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
3,356
Location
Arkansas
NPR program called 'On Point' has a program today discussing the pros and cons of expanding gun legislation.

http://www.onpointradio.org/shows/2006/06/20060626_a_main.asp

First interviewee was a Salon reporter arguing in favor of CA/NY style legislation nationwide.

Sorry if this is a dupe, I couldn't find another thread.

jmm

ps. notice the rhetoric of "illegal guns", attempting to spread the idea of ownership of firearms related to illegal activity.
 
I just wonder...

How many of these folks would change their mind if they or someone they cared about ended up shot?

Esp. when the places that have "gun control" have the most problems, statistically?

Ya just gotta wonder...
 
Jeez, Larry Pratt of GOA was under seige from all sides. Out of the four phone calls they took on the subject, two of them were associated with law enforcement (one was the Seattle police chief I believe) who were in favor of the legislation. Another guest was the Buffalo, NY, mayor.

The gentleman from Canada (who at the end of his comments tried to call into question the 2A based on the definition of an organized militia) made a comparison between Canada and the US, where he says the murder rate is 1/3 of what it is in the US. I'd like to see the solid numbers on what percentage of that crime was committed with firearms in both countries. I imagine it wouldn't be that different, but I don't know.

One caller clearly not in favor of gun ownership at all said that 'only the rich own guns.' :eek:

HOORAY! I'M RICH WITHOUT EVEN TRYING! :scrutiny:

Funny, I don't feel any different.

jmm
 
Wow. I can't believe it! This is incredible.

You mean somebody is still actually listening to NPR???????

hillbilly
 
hillbilly, I picked up the habit at that institution of higher learning, a short throw from you (ASU, Jonesboro). It's less obnoxious than commercial radio, but the programs like the one mentioned in this thread have become more and more rushed without getting into any serious discussion, very frustrating. The weekend programs are better.

It's the only news outlet I listen to on a regular basis that does its own reporting, unlike alot of news blogs that regurgitate material. I dropped TV years ago.

The usual host of 'On Point' is generally more objective that the guy that was hosting today. It definitely felt one-sided.

jmm
 
Pull NPR's federal funding and then make the scum put up the funds to keep their frequency at an auction.

I am damn tired of them, pull the plug.
 
I am listening to the program and two things stand out... The NEW "Assault Weapon" buzz word is "Illegal Guns" and they are using this word over and over. If you can say it long enough, people will subliminally think of guns as illegal, since they are not actually quantifying what makes a gun illegal. Gun rights advocates need to fight back against that word / idea.

Also, they are depending on the recent "rise in crime" as something that predicates the need for some kind of gun control, however no one is discussing the destruction of the culture that allows or facilitates young people in the psychological use of guns. Further to the above, they are white washing events like Katrina… Obviously Katrina did have an effect on Crime, but if they can white wash events were law abiding people used guns to defend themselves against the animals of society…

Anyway it is certainly an interesting twist in the debate.
 
It just seems intellectually lazy to me on going after guns to decrease harm and foul in society. Liberals tend to be very empathetic people. And that is great! But I think there are those few who cross the line into some kind of lunatic empathy. People like that become animal rights activists and the like.
Rwanda is an example on how things can still go awry even if you don't have access to firearms. Machete squads anyone?
Next thing will be "machete control".
Uhg.
Lunacy is lunacy no matter what it is wielding in its hands. Nice to know I'll have .45 ACP to stop the lunacy at my door should it get there.
 
wake up folks

Stop arguing "crime" with the anti's. They don't give a hoot about crime, crime rates, safety, or anything else. They ONLY want to ban guns. They ONLY want to take guns away from you and me. Start calling them liars. Start quoting themselves back to them when they are heard speaking to their own kind.

They are liars. At the top they are hard-core socialists and communists, at the botom they are "useful idiots" who do nothing but emote.

Start calling them what hey are. Stop trying to make sense of them.

When you let them set the terms for the debate, you have already lost.
 
JesseJames

Rwanda is an example on how things can still go awry even if you don't have access to firearms. Machete squads anyone?
Next thing will be "machete control".
Click to expand...

Do you think the anti's just don't know this? You think they just need to be shown the truth and then they'll come around?

They DON'T CARE!

They just want your guns. Any excuse will do.

Does anyone remember Bill Clinton? A lie is just as valid as the truth, if its operable.
 
I wanted to hear that show when I heard it was on, but then I thought for like 2 seconds and realized that I could predict almost the entire content of the show without hearing it. From this thread, I can tell I was correct.
 
I find it amazing that the LEO's know so much about the illegal gun trade situation....but cant come up with a clear targeted response that deals with it and it the same time protects the Bill of Rights/Law abidding citizen.


Looking at the Panel of guests.......looks fair and balenced to me:barf:
The moderator is a snob and a condescending one at that. He tries to sound so logical and "reasonable". The whole if we could just have "common sense" gun laws....line comes to mind.

common sense budgetting comes to mind and kick NPR out to the free market. I'm sure it will do just fine........
 
I don't think ALL liberals are socialists or communists. I do think a significant number of them are. I think many are just people who allow emotion/empathy to dominate their decisions and don't think things through fully.

Personally, I think they lack a full understanding of human nature.
 
Think of the long term effects of calling guns illegal in generalitys, it actually makes people use them expressly for illegal purposes. They get wrapped up in the idea and eventually they forget what there for, target shooting, defence, tactical efficiency. Eventually people will only use them in heated moments, my only comfort is by then most people wont even remember its squeeze not pull. But what do we do when we live in a pool of ignorence? We cant all fit in the mountains.
 
I just wonder...

How many of these folks would change their mind if they or someone they cared about ended up shot?

Esp. when the places that have "gun control" have the most problems, statistically?

Ya just gotta wonder...
Click to expand...

An old friend's step daughter was raped and stabbed 19 times and lived. Neither one think a gun is a good thing to have around. Go figure.
 
cuchulainn said:
Window into a gun grabber's mind:

* Crime rises: "The gun control we have isn't working, proving we need more!"
* Crime falls: "The gun control we have is working, proving we need more!"
Click to expand...

Yeppers, and you can't unsalt the soup.
 
They had rifles in 1776?

I don't know about them just wanting my guns and nothing more. Banning guns isn't an end in and of itself, it must be a means to some other goal of theirs. Rather than just getting my hate on and doing battle with them at every turn, I think it's a good idea to educate the ignorant ones and expose the underhanded ones. If they want something drastic, like a police state or communism or both, then we need to escalate the discussion right up to their final goal, and discuss it in terms of ideals, rather that squabbling over other issues.

You see Al Gore's movie? Pretty interesting, and he used the old "boiling frog" metaphor. He said that the right thing to do in that situation is rescue the frog. I think that metaphor works pretty well for this sort of political discussion as well. The ones that are being boiled should be rescued, and the ones doing the boiling shouldn't be able to hide their culinary efforts behind baby steps. They say, "Let's turn this up one more notch, guys. It isn't too hot for you right now, right? One more notch won't do anyone any harm," while they write up the menu. That's dishonest, and dishonesty should be our enemy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Politicians Want Gun Buyers Checked, Not Illegal Aliens
Replies
10
Views
581
Waitone
W
D
  • Locked
Ottawa may sue U.S. gun makers
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
Glenn Kelley
G
D
  • Locked
Reps. Goode and Paul to offer pro-gun amendment to stop TSA obstruction
Replies
1
Views
351
Poodleshooter
P
T
  • Locked
States Consider Gun-Access Laws
Replies
8
Views
498
eric.cartman
E
J
  • Locked
McCarthy & Schumer at it again...
Replies
0
Views
334
Jayman
J
Back
Top