It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

After TV Slaying, Reporter's Dad Finds Voice on Gun Control

page: 5
22
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2015 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders

Yeah, when we talk about slippery slope, this is it.
Anybody could get railroaded by the mental health profession.




posted on Aug, 29 2015 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: mrwupy

God Damn I hope you are not a prophet. I hope us Americans keep ours guns and then some. It's the only true protection for your family, when government is so inept.



posted on Aug, 29 2015 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: harvestdog
a reply to: mrwupy

God Damn I hope you are not a prophet. I hope us Americans keep ours guns and then some. It's the only true protection for your family, when government is so inept.


You know the people who really kill me? We have someone like reldra on this board. I enjoy talking to them. Nice enough person. But they are believers jade helm is something evil. At the same time they feel limiting law abiding citizens access to various gun types , more laws more restrictions, more everything is the answer. We have a bunch. The government is evil, they are controlling, they want to implement a new evil type government. Great

If for no other reason if you believe the other stuff. How on earth do you also believe restricting weapon types, placing restrictons, etc helps. Considering if it does the people you will want to step up are the very people who chances you want to limit. There seems something odd about the logic there. But this is all fantasy anyway for those who want more gun control.



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Andy Parker - The Actor - Virginia Live News Shooting
www.youtube.com...



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 03:03 AM
link   
a reply to: harvestdog

Here's the thing. I would say those mentally ill people (violent psychopaths) who had inflicted harm in the past should not have the right to own guns.



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 04:16 AM
link   
While very tragic, not sure if his directed attention on this is going to solve anything. How about mental illness dealt with when it appears that people are not being treated properly. Aren't reports now saying that gun control would not have been a factor in stopping this killer?

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: whyamIhere

Because "the cause" John Walsh turned it into is something...what, bad? Hardly. And kindly remember that Walsh was involved in luxury real estate and management before his son was ever murdered.

@ OP - the father is lashing out. Can't lash out at the shooter, he's dead. Next best thing? Guns. He's gotta hit back at somebody. I don't see an agenda. Not yet anyway.


I just don't think Walsh should of made a Television career on the back of his dead son.

Not saying he couldn't hit back. I could be wrong. I just wouldn't do it.



originally posted by: whyamIhere
Sorry....

I'm sick of victims like John Walsh becoming rich and famous.

Having a family member killed is absolutely horrible.

Turning it into some kind of cause...Well, it's not what I would do.


Prior to the tragedy with his son and the attention brought the growing S. Florida population and crime to the area wasn't addressed accordingly when dealing with missing children for example(child finger printing became common after for example). To say despite just the TV show more came out of his involvement. Nationally, as more commonly known, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children was formed.



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

Who cares if he knows the difference between a machine gun or a AR-15, what a ridiculous point to get all wound up about!


I'd argue that its actually quite important. If there's ever going to be a middle ground on this issue, the antis are going to have to take the time to educate themselves on these types of issues, because otherwise, the pro-gun side is never going to take them seriously. Nor should they. If this was any other issue, no one would expect them to. You can't have a serious discussion with people who talk about '30 caliber clip magazines' or think barrel shrouds are 'things that go up' and desperately need to be banned.

As a practical matter, this starts becoming a problem the instant you start trying to distinguish between AR-15s and any other semi-automatic 'hunting rifle.' What's the practical difference between an AR-15 with a 10 round magazine and a Mini-14 with a 10 round magazine? That one had the authors of the 2013 Feinstein ban proposal stumped. They ultimately settled on specifically banning and specifically allowing two different versions of the Mini-14 based purely on cosmetic features, which was complete nonsense. They're functionally identical, yet one would be illegal and one not? This is only one example, there were plenty of others.

Yet this is the type of crap that the pro-gun side is supposed to put up with from the politicians that would write these bills...
edit on 30-8-2015 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: starwarsisreal

In that situation, I think the gun issue is a non-starter. If someone has been violent in the past, to the point you couldn`t trust them with a gun, I wouldn`t trust putting them back in the public at all.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

Who cares if he knows the difference between a machine gun or a AR-15, what a ridiculous point to get all wound up about!

Yet this is the type of crap that the pro-gun side is supposed to put up with from the politicians that would write these bills...


If we were talking about politicians who are looking to pass gun control bills, then I would completely agree that they have an obligation to educate themselves on the issue.

But to me, it kind of just proves how weak the anti-gun regulation arguments are, when they feel the need to attack a man whose just lost his daughter in a senseless shooting, simply becuase he used the wrong terminology.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

No, its a valid point. Because an AR15 is not a machine gun. A machine gun is a gun that has had alterations made to make it fully automatic. And that is already against the law.

I have 2 rifles that are .22. Both are semiautomatic (meaning i just pull the trigger, another round fires). One looks like a cowboys rifle, the other looks like an assault rifle. Inside of how they look...they are nearly identical rifles. The mechanisms are identical.

I could buy an AR15 and dress it up in a different stock and general configuration so that it looks like a cowboys rifle...and no one would bat an eye.

When people want to take away my rights, and they have no education on what that means...i should be allowed to take exception.

The fact that his daughter just was murdered on TV is irrelevant and an appeal to emotion. What you are saying with that is "he is irrational with grief". So i find it incredibly difficult to figure out why he is even talking about it? And why people are pointing to him as the voice of reason in the gun debate. He is irrational with grief, and incapable of being a voice of reason.

It tells me how weak the gun control proponents argument is when they have to leech off this mans grief to try to score a political point, when any point would be derived from irrationality.
edit on 8/31/2015 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:23 AM
link   
I don't know what its like in every state but in the states where I have purchased firearms you have to fill out forms that directly address the issue of mental illness. That is supposed to be part of the background check now.

I am not certain of the exact wording, but it is something like, "Have you ever been adjudicated mentally ill or been institutionalized for mental illness?" If you answer 'yes' you are prohibited from purchasing firearms. Furthermore, in Illinois, you can not live in a home with firearms, even if they are not yours, because you still have access to them.

If you have not been determined to be mentally ill and legally purchased firearms, then were subsequently determined to be mentally ill the doctors/institution making that determination are required to ask if you own or have access to firearms. These questions seem simple, and indeed they are, but if you lie answering any one of them, you are committing a felony. One felony conviction is all it takes to prohibit you from owning firearms for life.

We live in the computer age. There is no reason, other than the inherent ineffectiveness of government, that the agencies and institutions who need this information cannot communicate in real time. When a court determines someone is mentally ill that information should immediately be passed on to the agency who conducts the background checks in that state. The agencies who receive that information are bound by HIPPA to keep it private and use it only for the purposes of performing their duties satisfactorily.

If the background checks are performed properly the issue should be controlled, with the notable exception of firearms purchased illegally from unlicensed vendors - criminals. No amount of legislation will ever prevent that from happening. Legislation doesn't work on criminals. That is why we call them criminals. They break the law.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:24 AM
link   
The Father needs to be fighting , not for Gun controls, but for mental illness, since the Killer said himself, that he had long been a powder keg waited to explode. The Amount of stress people are having to endure, and then instead of dealing with that stress head on, they go get a prescription to numb the pain, leading to a build up of stressful life choices that are just looking for an easy way out. Its like an earthquake, the pressure builds and build until one day, the underlying rock cant take it anymore and slips out. Then there is the media, and since people know that they dont have much to loose, then why not make a huge crisis out of their own pety crisis. 24 hour coverage on the event and the killers name blasted all over the world. Its a sick and twisted way to get attention. Gun Control, there is already so much gun control its absurd, now I do agree that if someone wants to carry a gun then they must first pass some kind of psyc evaluation. I would be ok with that, I do have a Concealled carry permit, and wouldnt mind taking a psyc evaluation maybe everytime we go to get it renewed..



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:27 AM
link   
People are talking of firearm ownership as if it were a privilege instead of a right.

I feel for a grieving father, but I must disagree with his stance.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


What you are saying with that is "he is irrational with grief".


No I'm saying his daughter got shot less than a week ago and he (understandably) hasn't had the time to research the correct terminology of what defines a machine gun. He just knows there's a huge problem with the lack of gun control in the US, just like nearly everyone outside the US and a large amount of people within the US a fully aware of.

The only single logic argument the pro gun advocates have against common sense regulations, is "its the 2nd amendment". But that really doesn't make much sense either, since if the amendments are so sacred, then why did they get rid of the 18th amendment?
edit on 31-8-2015 by Subaeruginosa because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
People are talking of firearm ownership as if it were a privilege instead of a right.

I feel for a grieving father, but I must disagree with his stance.


Well said, and we would be well advised to remember that.

That having been said, I like the idea of better background checks. I do believe there are some people who simply should not own or have access to firearms. I am as devoted to 2A as anyone, but I am a realist too. However, I do not, and will never, agree with blanket legislation meant to disarm the general public.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:37 AM
link   
All you really need to know about this guy is:

"He is a former member of the Henry County Board of Supervisors and led a failed run for Democratic seat for the state legislature."

He's trying to remain relevant and he's taking advantage of his daughter's death to get some publicity.

He's a scumbag.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa



The only single logic argument the pro gun advocates have against common sense regulations, is "its the 2nd amendment". But that really doesn't make much sense either, since if the amendments are so sacred, then why did they get rid of the 18th amendment?

You would have no problem getting rid of the First Amendment then?
Not like it is sacred or anything, right?
How about the Fourth Amendment?



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

Who cares if he knows the difference between a machine gun or a AR-15, what a ridiculous point to get all wound up about!

Yet this is the type of crap that the pro-gun side is supposed to put up with from the politicians that would write these bills...


If we were talking about politicians who are looking to pass gun control bills, then I would completely agree that they have an obligation to educate themselves on the issue.

But to me, it kind of just proves how weak the anti-gun regulation arguments are, when they feel the need to attack a man whose just lost his daughter in a senseless shooting, simply becuase he used the wrong terminology.


So if a woman died of a heroin overdose and her father came out wanting to ban marijuana because "all drugs are exactly the same, the technical details don't matter", you'd support that?

That's essentially what you're saying.
edit on 8/31/2015 by Answer because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


What you are saying with that is "he is irrational with grief".


No I'm saying his daughter got shot less than a week ago and he (understandably) hasn't had the time to research the correct terminology of what defines a machine gun. He just knows there's a huge problem with the lack of gun control in the US,


An appeal to emotion


just like nearly everyone outside the US and a large amount of people within the US a fully aware of.


An appeal to majority



The only single logic argument the pro gun advocates have against common sense regulations, is "its the 2nd amendment". But that really doesn't make much sense either, since if the amendments are so sacred, then why did they get rid of the 18th amendment?


The logic is simple: if we are to have a discussion it should be predicated on the fallacy that a law create a change. Murder is already illegal. And 78% of all shootings in the US are done with an unregistered firearm. Which means that any law put in place would have had no effect on 78% of all shootings.

to your point in the other thread: i don't need to know how to get ahold of something on the black market. Everyone has that one cousin (or old high school friend) that is a little shady.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa


The only single logic argument the pro gun advocates have against common sense regulations, is "its the 2nd amendment". But that really doesn't make much sense either, since if the amendments are so sacred, then why did they get rid of the 18th amendment?


Funny you bring up the 18th Amendment which was a FAILED attempt to solve problems by making something illegal.

Ironic...



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join