DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Another school shooting
Pages:   ... ...
Showing posts 251 - 275 of 1205, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/16/2012 01:36:00 PM · #251
Originally posted by alfresco:

Redirect: food for thought

Wow... Just, wow...
12/16/2012 01:36:43 PM · #252
Originally posted by sfalice:

Do you have any thoughts on how you and I can implement any of them?

State and federal legislators have the power to act, but rarely the will. Write to them. That what representatives are for, and they cannot represent us if we don't communicate with them.
12/16/2012 01:42:19 PM · #253
Originally posted by alfresco:

Redirect: food for thought

Absolutely!
12/16/2012 01:52:59 PM · #254
In the wake of September 11, the Roves, Wolfowitzes and Ashcrofts used the tremendous wave of emotion to decimate civil liberties and propel the industry of war beyond comprehension.

It would be nice to see a similar response that focused inward. Our infrastructure is at a breaking point and the social services that are vital to maintaining a healthy society are under attack.

Hopefully this horrible tragedy can lead to something positive.
12/16/2012 01:57:48 PM · #255
Yes. I think a lot of what has been in this thread is good for them. I've already started to pull many things together.

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by sfalice:

Do you have any thoughts on how you and I can implement any of them?

State and federal legislators have the power to act, but rarely the will. Write to them. That what representatives are for, and they cannot represent us if we don't communicate with them.
12/16/2012 02:21:09 PM · #256
Originally posted by PGerst:

Yes. I think a lot of what has been in this thread is good for them. I've already started to pull many things together.

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by sfalice:

Do you have any thoughts on how you and I can implement any of them?

State and federal legislators have the power to act, but rarely the will. Write to them. That what representatives are for, and they cannot represent us if we don't communicate with them.


I like to think of DPC, and especially in this thread, as a microcosm of the United States.
Perhaps, if we get motivated to "do something" then there is hope for us all.

12/16/2012 02:21:44 PM · #257
Originally posted by sfalice:

That's a good start, ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21_F.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21_F.gif', '/') + 1) . ' escapetooz.
Reaching out to those around us works both ways, too.
We are all strengthened by a sense of community.

Another way to combat the specific tragedy we've just endured, and I touched on this earlier:
Write your Senator and/or your Congressional representative.

I just sent this to Diane Feinstein. She's my senator, but any US citizen can write.
Be forewarned. If you use this email address you cannot remain anonymous.

I was so very pleased to just read the following in a news article:

"To that end, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D, said she intended to introduce a gun control bill on the first day of the next Congress. Paired with a twin version in the House, Feinstein's law would take aim at limiting the sale, transfer and possession of assault weapons, along with the capacity of high-capacity magazines. "

Please let me know of anything I can do to help with this effort.

Alice Steele


Sigh.

Do you even know what a FFL is? Do you understand that I will still be able to pay a nice large tax and own a grenade launcher with live grenades, along with anti-air craft weapons and fully automatic weapons that are exactly the same as the military uses?

Banning "assault" rifles is silly, since the civilian weapons that the initiative is targeted at are little more than cosmetically altered hunting rifles.
12/16/2012 02:25:51 PM · #258
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by alfresco:

Redirect: food for thought

Wow... Just, wow...


Sounds EXACTLY like my mother. (the boy in the story.. Not the mother.. ;) )./.

Message edited by author 2012-12-16 14:26:19.
12/16/2012 02:27:01 PM · #259
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by sfalice:



Sigh.

Do you even know what a FFL is? Do you understand that I will still be able to pay a nice large tax and own a grenade launcher with live grenades, along with anti-air craft weapons and fully automatic weapons that are exactly the same as the military uses?

Banning "assault" rifles is silly, since the civilian weapons that the initiative is targeted at are little more than cosmetically altered hunting rifles.

Cory, are you going to shoot armadillos with all that weaponry? Or start another civil war.
In any event, I will look forward to the day when it's a little more difficult for folks to shoot up little girls and boys in first grade.
12/16/2012 02:41:58 PM · #260
Originally posted by sfalice:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by sfalice:



Sigh.

Do you even know what a FFL is? Do you understand that I will still be able to pay a nice large tax and own a grenade launcher with live grenades, along with anti-air craft weapons and fully automatic weapons that are exactly the same as the military uses?

Banning "assault" rifles is silly, since the civilian weapons that the initiative is targeted at are little more than cosmetically altered hunting rifles.

Cory, are you going to shoot armadillos with all that weaponry? Or start another civil war.
In any event, I will look forward to the day when it's a little more difficult for folks to shoot up little girls and boys in first grade.


Neither, since I have a plethora of other hobbies that absorb my money, so it's extremely unlikely that I'd bother - especially considering that I rarely ever find time to shoot any of the half-dozen or so guns I already own.

Still, I'd just prefer that folks were advocating for things that made sense, I'm all for reducing the opportunities for the mentally ill and otherwise off-base folks who would do this, but the solution to this problem is something that's far more complex (and productive!) than just banning a few weapons.

Effectively the answer to the problem is to address the underlying problem (mental illness, poor treatment of others, social values, etc), rather than try to ban some means to an end. We have seen, with the prohibition, and the war on drugs, and with the Taliban's attempts to ban education, bans on things simply don't work - prohibition only leads to more criminal activity and often is accompanied by an increase in the problem rather than a reduction (an easy to imagine scenario in the US given the number of guns already available, and the fact that law-abiding citizens tend to follow the laws, whereas criminals do not).. Look at history and consider what really works, and what is destined to failure.

I could honestly care less about my guns these days, but I think taking away the means is, at best, a bandaid, a temporary solution to a problem that is much larger and more difficult to solve. In effect, it's the lazy solution to a very hard problem.

Message edited by author 2012-12-16 14:44:27.
12/16/2012 02:53:18 PM · #261
Well said.

As I stated in other posts, there are two pieces, people and guns. You need to take one out of the equation. Clearly, its reducing the availability of guns. How to accomplish that is a whole different story. And, as you so well pointed out, what politician is going to push this so boisterously when their job is governed by the votes of people who want no reduction?

It becomes a very sad horrific possibility that this needs to occur often enough to affect enough people to turn the voting over.

Maybe I'm wrong about that, but there is no evidence that is sticking out at the moment that would convince me otherwise.

Originally posted by scalvert:

There are no shortage of ideas that can make a difference while preserving the right to gun ownership, only a shortage of the political courage to make it happen.
12/16/2012 03:12:13 PM · #262
Originally posted by sfalice:


Cory, are you going to shoot armadillos with all that weaponry?
In any event, I will look forward to the day when it's a little more difficult for folks to shoot up little girls and boys in first grade.


Actually, yes. The AR style rifle is very popular with hunters because it's accurate, modular, parts are readily available.

Why don't you look instead at the person who committed the act instead of focusing solely on the tool? If he had instead taken his mother's car and driven through the playground at recess, would you discuss banning cars?
12/16/2012 03:12:36 PM · #263
Originally posted by PGerst:

there are two pieces, people and guns. You need to take one out of the equation. ...what politician is going to push this so boisterously when their job is governed by the votes of people who want no reduction?

I'm all for banning people, which takes care of the second part. ;-)
12/16/2012 03:20:40 PM · #264
Originally posted by Spork99:

If he had instead taken his mother's car and driven through the playground at recess, would you discuss banning cars?

Of course not. Which (again) is why nobody is proposing banning guns. We would also NOT be entertaining the thought of training and arming teachers with anti-tank missiles so they can dash to the rescue or challenge the need for discussion out of ridiculous fear of having our cars taken away. We'd be having a more rational conversation on ways to reduce similar events in the future, such as crash barriers.
12/16/2012 04:01:23 PM · #265
So am I....but I had to change after I was told I was being a "jerk" for saying that....go figure. :)

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by PGerst:

there are two pieces, people and guns. You need to take one out of the equation. ...what politician is going to push this so boisterously when their job is governed by the votes of people who want no reduction?

I'm all for banning people, which takes care of the second part. ;-)
12/16/2012 04:03:35 PM · #266
Very poor comparison. It makes no sense to make these sort of comparisons, they are not even remotely close to each other. Hopefully, those who will be arguing over this in the legislature know better.

Originally posted by Spork99:

If he had instead taken his mother's car and driven through the playground at recess, would you discuss banning cars?
12/16/2012 04:07:15 PM · #267
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Spork99:

If he had instead taken his mother's car and driven through the playground at recess, would you discuss banning cars?

Of course not. Which (again) is why nobody is proposing banning guns. We would also NOT be entertaining the thought of training and arming teachers with anti-tank missiles so they can dash to the rescue or challenge the need for discussion out of ridiculous fear of having our cars taken away. We'd be having a more rational conversation on ways to reduce similar events in the future, such as crash barriers.


Well it might be a different story if car ownership for militias were mentioned in the Constitution. We'd then have a ruling by SCOTUS redefining "militia" as meaning "everyone" as is the case now, in which case someone here would be arguing how adding stop signs and traffic lights won't stop everyone from running them therefore we shouldn't do it.

This whole situation is f'ed up. Monica proposed changing the culture in which we treat others, but right now it seems we have too many weeds in the yard for that to take serious root. Maybe we should just ban 24 hour cable news and see where that takes us in 10 years? Anything has to be better than the garbage we have now on the air waves.

Message edited by author 2012-12-16 16:19:06.
12/16/2012 04:30:19 PM · #268
As much as I hate internet memes, parahrasing one, perhaps from John Oliver it went...

"One failed attempt at a shoe bomb and we take off our shoes at the airport. Thirty-One school shootings since Columbine and no change in our regulation of guns."

The NRA lobby is too powerful.
12/16/2012 04:35:08 PM · #269
I think it is time for armed gaurds at every school and mall.
12/16/2012 04:45:08 PM · #270
Originally posted by Spork99:

Why don't you look instead at the person who committed the act instead of focusing solely on the tool? If he had instead taken his mother's car and driven through the playground at recess, would you discuss banning cars?

Regulating firearms as stringently as we do cars might be a good start: state licensing, madatory liability insurance, built-in security systems, registration, yearly inspections ...

Message edited by author 2012-12-16 16:45:32.
12/16/2012 05:24:26 PM · #271
Originally posted by blindjustice:

The NRA lobby is too powerful.


Which is quite remarkable when you consider they don't even match up spending-wise to the other heavy hitters on K Street (i.e. oil, pharma, union groups, etc). However, they do outspend their gun control rivals by a great margin and their ability to rally the troops is second to none.
12/16/2012 05:36:18 PM · #272
//janedevin.com/2012/12/16/the-2nd-amendment-is-the-intent-clear/

Originally posted by blindjustice:

As much as I hate internet memes, parahrasing one, perhaps from John Oliver it went...

"One failed attempt at a shoe bomb and we take off our shoes at the airport. Thirty-One school shootings since Columbine and no change in our regulation of guns."

The NRA lobby is too powerful.


Message edited by author 2012-12-16 17:36:30.
12/16/2012 06:04:30 PM · #273
Originally posted by yanko:

Monica proposed changing the culture in which we treat others, but right now it seems we have too many weeds in the yard for that to take serious root.


Monica, however, was the first to make a proposal that could be implemented at the local level. Grass roots level, if you will, by each of us. Dig up the weeds, one by one. Eventually that will make a difference.

Oh, yes. and email those folks in the House and the Senate. Get some indignation going.

12/16/2012 06:51:52 PM · #274
Not sure about other towns in CT, but we just got a message that they will have police at all schools tomorrow and will not have discussions with grades K-5, but will with the older kids.

I'm quite happy about the latter as I don't think my 6 year old should be worrying about that when she needs to worry about reading and math. But, police presence I'm not too sure about. Could spark questions. Unless they plan to do this from now on and forever, this seems like a mere attempt to calm the nerves of people post event. Its nice that its being done, but would hope something more lasting is done overall (throughout the country).
12/16/2012 06:59:34 PM · #275
Originally posted by PGerst:

Not sure about other towns in CT, but we just got a message that they will have police at all schools tomorrow and will not have discussions with grades K-5, but will with the older kids.

Same here.

Originally posted by PGerst:

police presence... seems like a mere attempt to calm the nerves of people post event.

Bingo.
Pages:   ... ...
Current Server Time: 05/30/2020 12:13:49 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 05/30/2020 12:13:49 PM EDT.