Comments on: “30 Dead and Counting!” http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/ Skepticism Is a Virtue Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:43:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: YourMessias http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1008 Tue, 17 Apr 2007 16:18:28 +0000 http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1008 I guessed it to be like that. Thank you for the information. It's kind of sad to see how bluntly such polls (like the one you mentioned) are ignored as long as politicians benefit from it. I guessed it to be like that. Thank you for the information.
It’s kind of sad to see how bluntly such polls (like the one you mentioned) are ignored as long as politicians benefit from it.

]]> by: Mark Beyer http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1006 Tue, 17 Apr 2007 16:05:28 +0000 http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1006 American referendums are held locally (perhaps some states have them), but never at the federal level. The Founders didn't really trust people any more than they trusted government, if that makes any sense. However, in USA local and state law cannot supersede national law. In other words, local governments can create all sorts of hurdles to buy guns, but they cannot ban them outright. Some states have hugely strict gun purchase and control laws, and others, like Alabama and Virginia, you can virtually buy a enough guns to fill a pickup truck with as little as a signature and the right amount of cash. American referendums are held locally (perhaps some states have them), but never at the federal level. The Founders didn’t really trust people any more than they trusted government, if that makes any sense. However, in USA local and state law cannot supersede national law. In other words, local governments can create all sorts of hurdles to buy guns, but they cannot ban them outright. Some states have hugely strict gun purchase and control laws, and others, like Alabama and Virginia, you can virtually buy a enough guns to fill a pickup truck with as little as a signature and the right amount of cash.

]]> by: YourMessias http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1004 Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:36:43 +0000 http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1004 That kind of sounds as if it was part of a bad movie that digged up yet another conspiracy theory. Haha. This, however, makes the fact that it actually isn't a bad joke even worse. I don't know, do you have referendums on such things? Or were they possible at least? (I don't know if it is the right word. :x I am refering to the German word "Volksentscheid" here, which means that everyone (that could vote) is asked about an issue and the "Volk" therefore decides. It is like an election... This totally leaves the politicans out - well, they can vote. But that's about it.) Or would the federal system allow prohibitions in certain States at least? That kind of sounds as if it was part of a bad movie that digged up yet another conspiracy theory. Haha.
This, however, makes the fact that it actually isn’t a bad joke even worse.

I don’t know, do you have referendums on such things? Or were they possible at least?
(I don’t know if it is the right word. :x I am refering to the German word “Volksentscheid” here, which means that everyone (that could vote) is asked about an issue and the “Volk” therefore decides. It is like an election… This totally leaves the politicans out - well, they can vote. But that’s about it.)

Or would the federal system allow prohibitions in certain States at least?

]]> by: Mark Beyer http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1002 Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:22:24 +0000 http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1002 In some polls going back 10 years or so, there have been as many as 60% of people across the country who wanted handguns outlawed. Not a single member of Congress spoke for such action. They are all pretty much whores to political action committees, the lobby groups as you know that put up big dollars as campaign contributions...and can easily do so to an opponent if you don't do as they ask. Yes, this is the land of the free, where, as Bill Mahre once said, "Having 30 different kinds of mustard on the supermarket shelf is not freedom." In some polls going back 10 years or so, there have been as many as 60% of people across the country who wanted handguns outlawed. Not a single member of Congress spoke for such action. They are all pretty much whores to political action committees, the lobby groups as you know that put up big dollars as campaign contributions…and can easily do so to an opponent if you don’t do as they ask. Yes, this is the land of the free, where, as Bill Mahre once said, “Having 30 different kinds of mustard on the supermarket shelf is not freedom.”

]]> by: YourMessias http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1000 Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:41:02 +0000 http://www.democratic-conversation.com/30-dead-and-counting/#comment-1000 Not being allowed to carry weapons anyway, the discussion over here is kind of different. People try to find reasons for the "why". Why does a guy kill himself and others? The discussion, however, is not a real one, in my opinion. People (read: politicians) try to find something or someone that is "guilty". Right now, they tend to blame computer games. Some, those being not as short-sighted and stupid as those blaming computer games, even asked a little further (for example: why it is that easy to get yourself armed? [over here]). Not knowing the way such topics are discussed in the States, I'd like to know whether people seriously think about prohibiting handguns and other arms. Personally, I don't see a point in being allowed to carry a gun. I think avoiding such miseries is very difficult. Stopping someone that starts shooting at random people around him/her by using the gun I might be carrying myself might be an effective method. Nevertheless, I think that it is way more dangerous to allows about everyone to be armed. On the long run it should be a goal to prevent people from considering murder and suicide a solution to their problems. I confess it rather is a utopian goal, though. Not being allowed to carry weapons anyway, the discussion over here is kind of different. People try to find reasons for the “why”. Why does a guy kill himself and others?
The discussion, however, is not a real one, in my opinion. People (read: politicians) try to find something or someone that is “guilty”. Right now, they tend to blame computer games. Some, those being not as short-sighted and stupid as those blaming computer games, even asked a little further (for example: why it is that easy to get yourself armed? [over here]).

Not knowing the way such topics are discussed in the States, I’d like to know whether people seriously think about prohibiting handguns and other arms.
Personally, I don’t see a point in being allowed to carry a gun.

I think avoiding such miseries is very difficult. Stopping someone that starts shooting at random people around him/her by using the gun I might be carrying myself might be an effective method. Nevertheless, I think that it is way more dangerous to allows about everyone to be armed.

On the long run it should be a goal to prevent people from considering murder and suicide a solution to their problems.
I confess it rather is a utopian goal, though.

]]>