Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Bloomberg crowd attacking Wyoming

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by JohnM, Mar 18, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Nickel Plated

    Nickel Plated Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    Messages:
    385
    Just waiting for them to finally get too bold and run into the brick wall of the Soviet Union (which state would that be I wonder?) that just pummels them into oblivion and finally shuts them the hell up once and for all.
     
  2. Iggy

    Iggy Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,011
    Location:
    Wyoming
    They're liable to git dinged a little in Wyoming..:evil:

    Highest concentration of guns per person in the U.S.:cool:
     
  3. cleardiddion

    cleardiddion Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,353
    Location:
    US
    Truth.

    I don't know why they're always butting into other peoples' businesses.

    And, trying to get guns outlawed in Wyoming is like trying to get antelope declared an endangered species.
     
  4. Ankeny

    Ankeny Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2003
    Messages:
    2,131
    That's pretty much how we roll out here. I think Iggy and other Wyomingite forum members would all agree that Bloomberg and his cronies will be met with nothing but contempt outside of a few isolated pockets of like thinkers. Even many of the ultra liberal folks have moved here to hunt, fish, and shoot stuff. Not taking any thing for granted, just stating the way it is...
     
  5. Black Butte

    Black Butte Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2008
    Messages:
    888
    Bloomberg knows what's best for Wyoming.
     
  6. Tim the student

    Tim the student Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,426
    Location:
    IA
    Serious question: How much do you know about mental illness, or the DSM?

    Next question: Who do you think should decide what mental problems should be "on the list"?
     
  7. HorseSoldier

    HorseSoldier Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,297
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    There shouldn't be a criteria of "which diagnosis" that makes the list, but whether or not the person, for whatever reason or diagnosis, poses a danger to themselves and others.

    There should also be an appeal process of some sort in place so that we don't have issues of, say, someone in their teens or 20s having a major depressive episode and suicidal ideation translate into a 40 something year old healthy adult who went through a rough time a couple decades ago but is now well adjusted but still considered prohibited.
     
  8. PabloJ

    PabloJ Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    4,999
    Divide population of NYS by population of Wyoming x 11 and the numbers will probably be quite similar.
     
  9. gego

    gego Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    224
    Really. So if someone has mental problems, he or she doesn't have rights? You assume that because some of the 11,000 homicide deaths each year are caused by people with mental illness, all mentally ill people are dangerous. But is that true? The same could be said for people who drink alcohol. Some of them get violent and are more likely to commit a gun homicide, so by your logic anyone know to drink should be denied his 2nd amendment rights. Some drugs just make some people more violent and alcohol is one.

    What other right is denied before someone commits a crime? We don't require a background check and deny printing presses to those mentally ill, or take away a mentally ill persons right to freely exercise his religion. You need to first commit an act of aggression that is defined as a crime or demonstrate yourself to be a danger before your rights can be restricted through due process. How is taking your 2nd amendment right away due process if you have committed no crime and haven't been determined in court to be a danger to yourself or others because of your behavior.
     
  10. TexasBill

    TexasBill Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,126
    Location:
    Texas Gulf Coast
    WE'RE SORRY: YOUR ANSWER IS INCORRECT!

    According to the most recent state-by-state FBI figures I have (2010), the population of New York State is 34.26 times larger than that of Wyoming. In that year, New York State had 446 firearms homicides; Wyoming had 11. Adjusting for the difference in populations, Wyoming's figure would rise to about 378, 16% lower than New York's. New York's handgun homicides totaled 394. Wyoming's came to 7. With the same adjustment, Wyoming's number would rise to about 240, nearly 40% lower than the Empire State's.

    The leveling factor is normally x number of incidents per 100,000 people. By this measure, New York State had a higher handgun homicide rate than not only Wyoming, but 29 other states, as well.
     
  11. HorseSoldier

    HorseSoldier Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,297
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    NYC has about 8.3 million inhabitants, WY has about 576K, or NYC has 14 times as many residents as WY. It has 40 times as many murders.

    Assuming this response was aimed at my reply up thread, I would say this:

    If someone has mental health issues of such severity that they are having police contact and being referred into the court system because of them, then they should be evaluated to determine if their rights should be limited because their particular issues do or do not pose a risk to themselves or others.

    It's a pretty big straw man to get from that line of thinking to claiming mental problems = suspension of rights.

    In many jurisdictions, it is a crime to be intoxicated in possession of a firearm, or to carry a firearm in places which serve alcoholic beverages, or similar.

    Drivers licenses are revoked or suspended with pretty boring regularity when persons demonstrate that their driving poses a risk to themselves or others based on patterns of behavior and minor infractions.

    Adjudicated mentally defective = due process.

    The previously referenced Cho, for instance, had a lawyer present and representing him at the competency hearing that determined he was subject to court ordered outpatient treatment.

    See above. A magistrate and a special justice, in two separate hearings, both determined that based on the totality of the circumstances in front of them that Cho should be involuntarily subject to mental health treatment.
     
  12. Bill4282

    Bill4282 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2013
    Messages:
    161
    Bloomberg and his cronies are using the same tactic that many have before "divide and conquer " they are going after one state at a time. Due to small populations and proximity to California, western states will be the first targets and creep eastwardly.
     
  13. Hacker15E

    Hacker15E Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,511
    Location:
    Vegas
    Bloomberg has all ready stated that after he stops being Mayor of NYC, he is going to spend his fortune on his pet projects...

    ...this means years and years more of him trying to influence the gun control debate all over the country with LOTS of money.
     
  14. PabloJ

    PabloJ Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    4,999
    You forgot to include "undocumented beings" many of whom reside in places like NYC. The numbers would be very similar if you were able to use actual figures to do the math.
     
  15. PabloJ

    PabloJ Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    4,999
    Mikey knows what's best for Americans. There will be no gun violence and healthier population too. I can hardly wait!
     
  16. Derek Zeanah

    Derek Zeanah System Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    8,223
    Location:
    Statesboro, GA
    I'm just going to throw this out there so y'all have something else to think about.

    Let's pretend you have a daughter, and the worst happens: she gets raped.

    Odds are she's going to get some level of PTSD from that, just like combat vets do, and abused children, and abused dogs for that matter. If she's smart she'll get counseling and will come through it OK.

    Now, do you want her to be able to get a CCW, train with it, and make herself a much harder target for the predators of modern society? Of course you do.

    But if you make a diagnosis of PTSD something that prohibits gun ownership, then she never will.. Nor will a 3 year old pulled out of an abusive home, placed with a loving family and given appropriate counseling, when he comes of age. Because, you know, he had PTSD when he was a pre-schooler even though he made it out of childhood unbroken. Should he be forever denied the use of arms to defend his family?

    Mental health issues are harder than many seem to think from an "is this a good thing" perspective. It's worse when you look at the services that are available (or completely unavailable) in society and start talking about big changes and greater responsibilities placed on organizations that are seriously underfunded as it is.
     
  17. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,280
    Location:
    South Western, OK
    Bloomberg and his anti-self defense hacks will get run out of WY. Folks in WY enjoy their freedom.
     
  18. longknife12

    longknife12 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2010
    Messages:
    551
    Location:
    colorado
    Wyoming, get on top of this NOW! I never believed it could happen here or this fast!
    Dan
    :eek:
     
  19. mcdonl

    mcdonl Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    3,228
    Location:
    Southern Maine
    Ever heard of the well funded terrorist group HSUS? They are trying to get coyotes (by way of) hybrid wolfs on the protected list.

    You have no idea the power people have over the uneducated when fear is their weapon.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  20. bikerdoc

    bikerdoc Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    Messages:
    16,302
    Location:
    Southern Virginia
    Bloomberg and his money can be marginalized with focused, coordinated, action by united gun owners.
     
  21. rdhood

    rdhood Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    Messages:
    943
    When I read that, I read someone with absolutely no understanding of mathematics and the human condition.

    "Mental Problems" in a population is normally going to have a bell curve type of distribution. EVERYONE has mental problems... the only question is to their nature and intensity.
     
  22. beatledog7

    beatledog7 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    5,093
    Location:
    Tidewater
    There's no way we should be tolerating the name of the NYC mayor being mentioned in connection with gun control legislation in Colorado or Wyoming. Free speech is what it is, and Bloomberg can spend his own money as he chooses, but the people in those states need to recognize the source of the influence and be encouraged to ignore it. Pro-2A legislators and candidates should run ads exposing the source of the anti's money, thereby exposing the antis for selling their votes to the highest bidder. Then the people of those states can just say, "Thanks, Mike, for infusing money into our local economy. Now go away."

    Eventually New Yorkers will tire of Bloomberg's blatant overreach, and more importantly the utter ridiculousness of his ideas. Once that happens, and he gets voted out or just plain run off, his position will be weaker since he won't have the power of the NYPD to enforce his lunacy. Money talks, to be sure, but with only money and no office to push his agenda, he'll be weakened. Let us all hope he won't manage to buy his way into some higher office like he did a third term as NYC mayor.

    His latest ideas are to limit the volume of earbuds and force merchants to keep all tobacco out of public view. How many of these ludicrous new nanny rules will New Yorkers tolerate before they say to Bloomberg, "Shut up and go away!"
     
  23. Axel Larson

    Axel Larson Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    485
    Location:
    Vermont, now Saint Albans
    I skimmed the thread so if someone has already stated this sorry. Now the only way someone can lose a right is from a COURT of LAW having decided. Having a doctor or other person decide is going against due process and the 14th and 20th amendments period. :neener:
     
  24. Averageman

    Averageman Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,439
    Location:
    Texas
    Ever hear of this?
    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...-and-are-crazy-so-shouldnt-own-modern-rifles/

    Here are her exact words:

    The problem with expanding this is that, you know, with the advent of PTSD, which I think is a new phenomenon as a product of the Iraq War, it’s not clear how the seller or transfer of a firearm covered by this bill would verify that an individual was a member or veteran and there was no impairment of that individual with respect to having a weapon like this.
    I think we have to – if you’re going to do this, find a way that veterans who are incapacitated for one reason or another mentally, don’t have access to this kind of weapon.
    Yeah take a minute and read that and let her determine who is "Crazy".
    I know this is The High Road, but we continue to be polite and they continue to restrict our Rights. I think, no I wish Senator Cruz would have called her out on these lies She cpontinues to spread.
    This is Fascism and it will get worse if we and our Elected Representatives don't take off the kid gloves when dealing with these people and their lies.
     
  25. Pilot

    Pilot Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    6,605
    Location:
    USA
    Having lived in Colorado for several years, I was at once shocked, and then not so shocked by the current gun and mag ban frenzy, and political climate coming from statist control. Knowing Hick from being Mayor of Denver like I do, I have no doubt he will gleefully sign any more restrictive gun legislation when it reaches his desk.

    That being said, I am worried about states like Wyoming, and Montana. Their population centers have also received an influx of more statist thinking people from both coasts. Nothing wrong with transplants, but when they try to change the new place to resemble the old place, that's when the trouble begins. They do not have the intelligence to realize what made them move to the new state in the first place.

    We are being assaulted at every level of government. Fed, State, and local. We can no longer be complacent, and need to start using the tactics of the statists against them. It is time to take the gloves off.
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2013
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page