It sounds like something an anti-gun person would say about the gun industry.
Hypocrisy is NOT what we want to fight the antis with.
Wanye is out of his mind
- Thread starter Napalm
- Start date
- Status
It sounds like something an anti-gun person would say about the gun industry.
Hypocrisy is NOT what we want to fight the antis with.
Bobk538447
Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2011
- Messages
- 52
The NRA did not cave in their speech that's the bottom line. I sent them a contribution after the speech so that they can use it to help fight what we're up against.
tulsamal
Member
I've been a life member of the NRA since I was in my mid 20's. So that's around 25 years. They have done things over the years that thrilled me. And they've done things I wasn't all that happy about. Or even thought was wrong. I was actually worried when I heard they were going to make a statement. Thought they might actually come forward with some type of "compromise" that I was totally opposed to. But they stood firm on guns and I'm happy with that. I actually think Wayne did a good job.
Now I will say that I was very pleased with GOA in the past few days. I occasionally think they are a bit too ready to promote themselves but... can't deny we need some people like them. So I figure it is worth $20 a year to support them.
http://gunowners.co/new-annual-membership
Gregg
Now I will say that I was very pleased with GOA in the past few days. I occasionally think they are a bit too ready to promote themselves but... can't deny we need some people like them. So I figure it is worth $20 a year to support them.
http://gunowners.co/new-annual-membership
Gregg
Cosmo:
The good news is that the NRA didn't step up and agree to any restrictions. if they had, Republican congressmen could have voted for more gun control with no concern for voter backlash.
Rather than doing that, the NRA said (summarized):
I think these are all reasonable points. You're focusing on "OMG he mentioned video games I like, and I have rights to those games!"
You do. And a bipolar man thinks he has a right to pay for medical care without getting his name on a government database. Same with the depressed, the schizophrenic, etc.
The "we need to do something" types are going to infringe on someone's rights. Now the debate is no longer about just gun ownership, but the following have also been pushed into the debate:
He's also stepped up and argued that congress pass a bill allowing armed defenders before school resumes in January. If someone goes nuts in mid-january in another school the NRA will be saying "see? Why wasn't there armed security or a cop on-site? PASS IT NOW." Which will help shape the next debate.
He didn't call for video game bans. He didn't blame video games. He said that we have a culture that seems infatuated with violence.
The good news is that the NRA didn't step up and agree to any restrictions. if they had, Republican congressmen could have voted for more gun control with no concern for voter backlash.
Rather than doing that, the NRA said (summarized):
- There are evil people out there.
- The best way to deal with an evil man with a gun, is to make sure there's a good guy with a gun there
- This isn't a gun issue: we can't even track the number of crazies out there, and we have a culture that seems to celebrate violence, and news coverage helps immortalize the evil people who engage in these sorts of events.
- If we want to prevent these things in the future, then we need to have an armed response on-site to deal with them.
I think these are all reasonable points. You're focusing on "OMG he mentioned video games I like, and I have rights to those games!"
You do. And a bipolar man thinks he has a right to pay for medical care without getting his name on a government database. Same with the depressed, the schizophrenic, etc.
The "we need to do something" types are going to infringe on someone's rights. Now the debate is no longer about just gun ownership, but the following have also been pushed into the debate:
- First amendment concerns -- media coverage, TV programming, video games
- Gun free zones being nothing more than enforced defenselessness
- Medical privacy concerns.
- How much are we as a society willing to pay to defend against these rare but heartbreaking events, on both monetary and loss-of-rights terms?
He's also stepped up and argued that congress pass a bill allowing armed defenders before school resumes in January. If someone goes nuts in mid-january in another school the NRA will be saying "see? Why wasn't there armed security or a cop on-site? PASS IT NOW." Which will help shape the next debate.
He didn't call for video game bans. He didn't blame video games. He said that we have a culture that seems infatuated with violence.
Halal Pork
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 294
People are fired up and arguing. They're also cherry picking posts to sustain their "righteous" indignation. Even amongst ourselves, we can't have a real conversation. People are carefully choosing posts which allow them to have a shouting match rather than any sort of reasonable exchange of ideas. It seems to me we're well served by having others speak for us as a group since the most passionate among us tend to be the loudest, the most inarticulate, and the least thoughtful.
alsaqr
Member
Bingo!!!! Don't let trolls drive the train!!!!!!
Cosmoline
Member
No, we dismiss it because there's no evidence to support the claims in spite of 20+ years of research. And we dismiss it because many of us grew up playing these games. They don't make you into a killer anymore than reading a crme novel.
Yes that is good. But they could have done that by keeping their lips together. What they needed to do was respond to the lies with logic, and to offer something workable that doesn't infringe on rights and will also give our friends on the hill something to use. That was imperative. But they failed. Instead of helping to guide us in this time of trouble, they've thrown a brand new hornet's nest into the mix that actually divides gun owners against each other. Bad idea!
Not to mention the fact that, as I mentioned, this ain't no "shadow industry." These are huge companies with hundreds of millions of gamers worldwide who have been quite neutral and even somewhat RKBA friendly in the battle up to this point. We don't need any new enemies.
And news flash--gamers love guns! They're natural allies. And they're younger than your average hunter. Many are libertarian-minded. To slam that door shut was particularly stupid.
He said quite a bit more than that I'm afraid. He dredged up one of the sillier parts of the culture war using 20 year old talking points. A part that only a handful of ill-informed people even buy into anymore. He made us look old, foolish and befuddled.
And you better believe that the MSM is already ignoring 90% of what he said and focusing on the protestors and that soundbite about GTA and Mortal Kombat.
I have one thing to say about whoever came up with this idea--FINISH HIM!
Last edited:
xXxplosive
Member
Good Job.......Wayne..... +1.
SilentStalker
Member
I would have to agree with Cosmoline on this. Something is wrong with people that do things like this. Like he said a lot of us grew up playing stuff like this and we are all just fine. Games do not make you into something. It probably does not help but there is something going on with these people that make them like they are. How many of you played war when you were a kid? I bet a lot of people did, or had watergun battles, etc. all of which could be construed as being violent, yet back in those times there did not seem to be as much violence as there is today. If anything is the cause, it is society as a whole.
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
Cosmoline said:
Very good point, Cosmoline. Seriously, these guys really seem out of touch with the times. Mortal Combat was in the arcades in the early '90s... back when there were still arcades to visit. That's the best that the NRA could come up with? That sentence you quoted just sounds ridiculous. Even if video games are a contributing factor (IF), the NRA is still using an illogical method of arguing for the rights of gun owners ('Guns don't kill, people do, oh, and video games').
Time for some fresh perspectives from the NRA. Wayne isn't the only shooter who could be addressing the crowd.
Suggesting that a kid plays a violent video game and then feels a compulsion to go and massacre innocent children is no more logical than the anti-gun crowd saying that the kid had a "military grade" weapon, and then felt compelled to go kill these children. There is no simple answer.
At the very least, at least the NRA didn't bow to any idiotic calls for more gun laws!
I don't believe that either because it all depends on your upbringing. I do think it is misrepresenting gun ownership and what shooting is actually like. I played Call of Duty and the first thing I said was that the results of suppression were so wrong. That and all the guns being automatic are certainly having an effect of the perception of guns. Even the "military" ones didn't have three round bursts like the real ones.
So I think he was more attacking the perception that the anti-gun lobby is portraying and is supported by media and video games to people who have no clue what guns are actually like. I have asked many people and they have no idea what it feels like and sounds like to shoot. They don't know parts, and what they do comes from games. They don't know what it takes to purchase a gun, only the LIES that the media is giving.
Halal Pork
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 294
Cosmoline, please read up on LTC Grossman's books if you're so inclined. I don't know if the NRA's talking points are the most effective or not. However, they are not pulling anything out of thin air.
Teaching Kids to Kill
Not trying to single out Cosmoline at all; so anyone who has a few minutes can follow the link and decide from there if they wish to follow on further.
Been waiting for the NRA response for a while. Was this perfect? Apparently not everyone thinks so. I believe Mr. LaPierre was trying to say that the guns did not cause the murders, and that there are causal factors involved which made this 'human' murder those kids. No one knows the actual causal factors in this specific case, but in general, violence in movies and games (particularly images) can desensitize some individuals to violence (I admit, Mortal Kombat? Ok, I get it...). Mental illness also plays a part, as do a bunch of other things in a bunch of other crimes. Exactly how, in every case, we don't know, it's all soft science. And that stuff doesn't affect everyone the same. But that's closer to the core root of the problem than the mere presence of weapons. The availability of weapons does not CAUSE the problem. He simply tried to identify actual causes of the problem.
And he also came up with a solution to the problem. Implementation of this plan was just laid out in broad strokes, and this wasn't the time to lay out every little detail of executing it, but it certainly is better than the other "solutions" that have been put out by the anti's, which is really no solution at all. Smaller magazines? So the victims can run away between reloads? Really? Why don't we just buy everyone shiny new sneakers so that they can run FASTER then.
Some politicians saw that an AWB is a "symbolic" first step. Why not just take a REAL step, and try to fix the problem with a real solution? Mr. LaPierre just presented a real solution.
And he also came up with a solution to the problem. Implementation of this plan was just laid out in broad strokes, and this wasn't the time to lay out every little detail of executing it, but it certainly is better than the other "solutions" that have been put out by the anti's, which is really no solution at all. Smaller magazines? So the victims can run away between reloads? Really? Why don't we just buy everyone shiny new sneakers so that they can run FASTER then.
Some politicians saw that an AWB is a "symbolic" first step. Why not just take a REAL step, and try to fix the problem with a real solution? Mr. LaPierre just presented a real solution.
For normal folks violent video games, violent TV, nor guns are a problem. When you combine those factors with a person who is even slighlty unstable it is problem. Personally I think the violence in the games and in TV is at least partly reponsible for some of these incidents.
We have had weapons capable of doing things like this for close to 100 years now. We have always had mentally unstable people. But those unstable people have only been bring guns into schools and shooting defensless kids in recent years. There is something else going on here.
We have had weapons capable of doing things like this for close to 100 years now. We have always had mentally unstable people. But those unstable people have only been bring guns into schools and shooting defensless kids in recent years. There is something else going on here.
Cosmoline
Member
Ah yes, Grossman the self-proclaimed "Killology" expert who predicted a massive surge in violent crime rates as a result of video games two decades ago. Well that was a bunch of hogwash. And if the big plan is to try to use his bunk research as a counter to the anti's bunk research, then we need another plan stat!
The stakes are as high as they get. We win this by sticking with facts and keeping a level head while THEY go off on idiotic tangents. We don't join them in the idiocy.
There sure is. It's called deinstitutionalization. A big word for a big problem. Starting in the 70's the states shut down the asylums and reformed their laws to make it much more difficult to commit people who were insane. Treatment in the community has been the mantra for that. But unfortunately when funding for the huge asylums was cut, it was never replaced with funding for treatment. So we have a very thin patchwork net of services. This is unfortunate for those with typical depression and such. For the small number who are one missed pill away from mass murder, the results are worse than unfortunate.
The reason this didn't happen in the past is because in the past the people who have voices in their heads telling them to chop up babies were being cared for in state-funded asylums. They were not being let loose on the streets or stuck with families ill-equipped to handle their problems.
Our current laws don't distinguish between the merely suicidal and the actively homicidal. They need to! A new system designed to segregate and provide additional treatment for those who are a danger to others, not merely themselves, is badly needed. And it is a fact of life that if you have voices in your head telling you to kill children, you should never ever be permitted to own firearms, knives, or sharp sticks.
Last edited:
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
Halal Pork,
I've been to Col Grossman's seminars, and the man does have some good points. But, there's more to the issue than what he alludes to with violent video games being combat simulators. Arguably, millions of kids have played these games without harming anyone, just as millions of gun owners have owned guns without harming anyone. The root issue probably concerns the upbringing of the individual killer, and our society's inability to deal with his troubled nature before a catastrophe happens.
Anyway, the NRA did make some good points during their speech, but I'm with Cosmoline is saying that some of what they stated about video games sounded absurd.
I've been to Col Grossman's seminars, and the man does have some good points. But, there's more to the issue than what he alludes to with violent video games being combat simulators. Arguably, millions of kids have played these games without harming anyone, just as millions of gun owners have owned guns without harming anyone. The root issue probably concerns the upbringing of the individual killer, and our society's inability to deal with his troubled nature before a catastrophe happens.
Anyway, the NRA did make some good points during their speech, but I'm with Cosmoline is saying that some of what they stated about video games sounded absurd.
Halal Pork
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 294
I suggested the idea of a program something along the lines Troops to Teachers but for retiring police officers to one of my brothers whom is a LEO. The program, in my fantasy, would have retired police officers teachings some class or working in some normal school capacity. These people would, however, be armed. My brother told me the idea had been put forward a few times before. So my "novel" idea wasn't really original at all, it seems. It just goes to show we can learn a lot by what people have already suggested.
gc70
Member
Derek Zeanah said:
This point is absolutely huge. I have seen several discussions on gun forums acknowledging that draconian gun control laws would be the end result of a copycat incident in the immediate future.
The latest MK game came out in 2011, and the latest Splatterhouse was 2010. I think blaming video games is rubbish (never have come close to spending on shooting what I have on games), but just want to point out that they were at least genuinely recent titles.
parsimonious_instead
Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2010
- Messages
- 791
Governor Cuomo is the one who seems to be going full Col. Kurtz. Talking about outright confiscation, and limiting mags to seven rounds.
gc70
Member
Cosmoline said:
IMO this is the crux of the problem. But it is also the most difficult part of the problem to deal with. People with mental illnesses were mistreated decades ago and reform was needed. But the pendulum swung too far and we now need to find a better balance for the safety of society and the benefit of people with mental illnesses.
wacki
Member
I haven't heard the speech but it looks like the NRA is behaving rather wisely. They waited on this gallup poll:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...-School-Officials-Having-Guns-Than-Weapon-Ban
And then pushed for the three things that americans favored more than gun control.
30 second analysis says The NRA played their hand well.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...-School-Officials-Having-Guns-Than-Weapon-Ban
And then pushed for the three things that americans favored more than gun control.
30 second analysis says The NRA played their hand well.
Last edited:
The so called "tangents" of Mr. LaPierre's speech are what the anti's will make them out to be: pointless tangents. They parse words and statements and make soundbytes for their own agenda, and totally ignore the context of what is being said. Mr. LaPierre's message WILL be gutted by the media, no doubt about it. They have an agenda. They try to sound reasonable by saying "it's a complex issue" and "we know one piece of legislation won't stop this". The thing is, they'll agree to better mental health "processes", which is good, but they always throw the nonsense stuff in there like the AWB. They will agree to anything ELSE as well, because they have nothing to lose, but for them, it always comes back to the firearms, especially those mean ones painted in black, and they always direct the "conversation" right back to an AWB, instead of real solutions. They will never let that go, so they will utilize their propaganda spin machine to their benefit, and change what anyone says to suit their own ends. Most of the people believe what they hear on the news blindly.
- Status
Similar threads
