Or that they are an extremely homogenized culture?

Apparently not.

Do you know anything about Australia? Can you even point it on the map? About 1 in 3 people in Australia are born Overseas. Hence rapid population growth...

---

Why is there a debate about what other countries do? Theres no denying this country has a problem with gun violence. As we try to solve the world problems such as ridding the violence in the middle east, Europe, etc....our own back yard is a powder keg.

As we proclaim to be leaders and shining examples to the rest of the world, they in turn either laugh or shake their heads at what is happening here.

Then there are those that stoop to name calling, again displaying the arrogance that is perceived by so many, yet sadly those chest thumpers are in the minority and usually fit the bill on the names they use in calling out others.

 

When one states that armed citizens are safer, I wonder...when we are at a Christmas party, should we all be packing? And if, like in San Bernardino, people come in blazing AKs or the like...these pistol packing mamas would stop it? Or would that hinder a potential attack because the perps know the crowd is all armed? Most  are willing to die anyway.

I dunno. Its certainly a sad, complex issue. Politcizing it is pathetic.

 

One more thing..congress just denied a bill that would make it far more difficult, possibly deny a person on the FBI terror watch list to purchase a weapon. Why deny that? Hell, if you cant fly, you cant buy! Their rights are already taken by taking away freedom of travel, so saying its their right is hypocritical. Saying theyd get one illegally anyway is another cop out and weak answer

Just my two cents

---

Blakes Life Matters

One more thing..congress just denied a bill that would make it far more difficult, possibly deny a person on the FBI terror watch list to purchase a weapon. Why deny that? Hell, if you cant fly, you cant buy! Their rights are already taken by taking away freedom of travel, so saying its their right is hypocritical. Saying theyd get one illegally anyway is another cop out and weak answer

Just my two cents

 

There is no due process with no-fly list, and not even a mechanism in place to get yourself removed if you were placed there incorrectly. Note that Ted Kennedy was on the no-fly list, it's not exactly an accurate list.


 

The list itself is questionable, but at least there's no Constitutional requirement that the right to public transportation shall not be infringed.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Do you know anything about Australia? Can you even point it on the map? About 1 in 3 people in Australia are born Overseas. Hence rapid population growth...

 

Despite "rapid population growth", over 92% of Australia's population remains of European ancestry.

 

The other 8% are Indian, Chinese, African, Aboriginal, or otherwise.

 

http://www.indexmundi.com/australia/demo...ofile.html

 

With that being said, does being a part of a homogenized culture in Australia offend you for some reason? Are you offended by the European ancestry and culture it holds? Why else would you attack me personally?

 

For someone living in Australia, you sure don't know much about your own country.

---

You do realise that cultures and views aren't uniform across Europe right? You not notice that during recent Greek/German fallouts...


Of course you didn't, you clearly have never been to either Europe or Australia just prefer to parrot gun nut statistics and Google in the blanks.


Fun fact Melbourne is the 3rd largest greek speaking city in the world. Nice city you should visit some time, guns not required.

---

Turns out my fun fact is disputed...a good lesson in not accepting random statistics.

---

Why is there a debate about what other countries do? Theres no denying this country has a problem with gun violence. As we try to solve the world problems such as ridding the violence in the middle east, Europe, etc....our own back yard is a powder keg.

As we proclaim to be leaders and shining examples to the rest of the world, they in turn either laugh or shake their heads at what is happening here.

Then there are those that stoop to name calling, again displaying the arrogance that is perceived by so many, yet sadly those chest thumpers are in the minority and usually fit the bill on the names they use in calling out others.


When one states that armed citizens are safer, I wonder...when we are at a Christmas party, should we all be packing? And if, like in San Bernardino, people come in blazing AKs or the like...these pistol packing mamas would stop it? Or would that hinder a potential attack because the perps know the crowd is all armed? Most are willing to die anyway.

I dunno. Its certainly a sad, complex issue. Politcizing it is pathetic.


One more thing..congress just denied a bill that would make it far more difficult, possibly deny a person on the FBI terror watch list to purchase a weapon. Why deny that? Hell, if you cant fly, you cant buy! Their rights are already taken by taking away freedom of travel, so saying its their right is hypocritical. Saying theyd get one illegally anyway is another cop out and weak answer

Just my two cents

Because the no fly list is a list made without any court ruling or oversight, there is now way to know why someone is on the list and once on it no way to get off it. In order to revoke a constitionally protected right there has to be more justification than being abritrally put on a list. Otherwise the risk of abuse is magnified.

---

There is no due process with no-fly list, and not even a mechanism in place to get yourself removed if you were placed there incorrectly. Note that Ted Kennedy was on the no-fly list, it's not exactly an accurate list.


 
The list itself is questionable, but at least there's no Constitutional requirement that the right to public transportation shall not be infringed.

I don't know the answer, but did the recent attempted bill that failed address some of these issues?

One could argue also that ones constitutional right is infringed by not being allowed to move freely?

Teddy was on the no fly list? Did not know that either... But that's fine.. He should also have been on the no buy weapon list then. He couldn't fly, and damn sure couldn't drive.

---

Blakes Life Matters

gun free zones are feel good legislation that creates a fish in the barrel condition . what do all shootings have in common ? the cops get there too late . our forefathers got it right giving us the right to defend ourselves . the police cant. that's not who they are. they are a retaliation agency. cant do anything until the law is broke.

---

Washington Post: Gun Violence Declining, Except in Gun-Free Zones

 

On December 3, The Washington Post reported that gun crime has been on the decline for about 20 years, except for high-profile shootings in gun-free zones; WaPo claims those shootings are on the increase.

 

According to WaPo, “In 1993, there were seven homicides by firearm for every 100,000 Americans. … By 2013, that figure had fallen by nearly half, to 3.6 [per 100,000].

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/...ree-zones/

 

 

Hold on a second...


 

Did anyone read Teh Washington Post article this references? I went there and it's all about the decline in gun violence, but I don't see anything about gun free zones. This appears completely made up. I even searched the terms "gun free"  and "zones," but these words do not appear in the article.

---

'02

Hold on a second...


 

Did anyone read Teh Washington Post article this references? I went there and it's all about the decline in gun violence, but I don't see anything about gun free zones. This appears completely made up. I even searched the terms "gun free"  and "zones," but these words do not appear in the article.

 

Fact checking The Drifter is a full time job.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Hold on a second...


 

Did anyone read Teh Washington Post article this references? I went there and it's all about the decline in gun violence, but I don't see anything about gun free zones. This appears completely made up. I even searched the terms "gun free"  and "zones," but these words do not appear in the article.

 

It is in the Mother Jones study, like the article said.

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014...d-research

 

What our analysis reveals

As the chart above shows, a public mass shooting occurred on average every 172 days since 1982. The orange reference line depicts this average; data points below the orange line indicate shorter intervals between incidents, i.e., mass shootings occurring at a faster pace. Since September 6, 2011, there have been 14 public mass shootings at an average interval of less than 172 days. A run of nine points or more below the orange average line is considered a statistical signal that the underlying process has changed. (A nine-point run below the average is about as likely to occur by chance as flipping a coin nine times and getting heads nine times in a row—the probability is less than 1 percent. The 14-point run we see here is even more unlikely to have occurred by chance.) The standard interpretation of this chart would be that mass shootings, as of September 2011, are now part of a new, accelerated, process.

Because the chart signals that a new process started around September 2011, we can divide the chart at that point to analyze each phase separately. In the first 29-year phase, mass shootings occurred every 200 days on average. In the subsequent three-year phase, mass shootings occurred every 64 days on average:

 

The areas that Mother Jones was using in their study were gun-free zones.

---

It is in the Mother Jones study, like the article said.

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014...d-research

 

 

So the part about gun free zones has nothing to do with the Washington Post article? Granted it's there, but doesn't that make the title of the Briebert article a bit misleading. They implied all of this info was in the Washington Post in that title.


 

It's all good, and I'm not one of those who want to change the constitution, but I'm getting sick of misleading headlines.

---

'02

One more thing..congress just denied a bill that would make it far more difficult, possibly deny a person on the FBI terror watch list to purchase a weapon. Why deny that? Hell, if you cant fly, you cant buy! Their rights are already taken by taking away freedom of travel, so saying its their right is hypocritical. Saying theyd get one illegally anyway is another cop out and weak answer

Just my two cents

Have you ever seen how the no-fly list works? You're added to it silently, and you're not told why. Getting yourself off of it is an ordeal unto itself in arguing with a government bureaucracy that has no real interest in making things right with you. The best you can hope for is a Known Traveler Number (KTN) that tells airlines you're ok to fly--but you're not taken off the list.

 

I am not in favor of anything that completely deprives a person of their Second Amendment rights (or any right, for that matter) without due process being involved. If the federal government were to tell you that you were being added to a watch list, tell you exactly why you were being added, tell you how you can exercise an appeal at no cost to you through the legal system with representation from an attorney of your choice and keep you off of any and all watch lists until a court had issued a ruling indicating that the government has probable cause to add you to a terrorism watch list, then I'd be ok with denying the right to own guns.

 

But they'd never do that, would they? That would defeat the purpose of a secret watchlist--and the purpose of a secret watchlist is not to protect us by making sure the terrorists don't know they're being watched. It's to justify watching anyone and everyone, and restricting our activities accordingly.

---

I work with a guy who is a retired Marine with 24 years of service.  While in the Marines he pulled embassy duty in 3 different countries, one of them as the highest ranking Marine in country.  He's had higher security clearances and access greater than most politicians.  Yet he was on the no-fly list because of some fluke. He was guilty until proven innocent. 

---

I work with a guy who is a retired Marine with 24 years of service.  While in the Marines he pulled embassy duty in 3 different countries, one of them as the highest ranking Marine in country.  He's had higher security clearances and access greater than most politicians.  Yet he was on the no-fly list because of some fluke. He was guilty until proven innocent. 

Connecting flights in the wrong country can screw you over and get you on a "strip search" list for years afterwards, even if you never leave the airport terminal. It's not the no-fly list, but it might as well be. You go through the same security as everyone else, then you're pulled aside and taken to a back room with your belongings where every part of you--and I mean every part of you--is touched with an open palm and your belongings are taken out, dumped on a table and searched through piece-by-piece, including insistence that you unlock your cell phone for the screener to see what's on there.

 

In case you haven't figured it out yet, I found my way onto that list once. Apparently flying one-way on different airlines makes you a terrorist. Because, you know, if I was going to fly a plane into something, I'd totally buy a one-way ticket at the last second with cash just to make sure my reservation stood out.

---

I work with a guy who is a retired Marine with 24 years of service.  While in the Marines he pulled embassy duty in 3 different countries, one of them as the highest ranking Marine in country.  He's had higher security clearances and access greater than most politicians.  Yet he was on the no-fly list because of some fluke. He was guilty until proven innocent. 

 

Guilt by association...with you.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Because the no fly list is a list made without any court ruling or oversight, there is now way to know why someone is on the list and once on it no way to get off it. In order to revoke a constitionally protected right there has to be more justification than being abritrally put on a list. Otherwise the risk of abuse is magnified.

Agreed. I think most Americans agree with the abomination that is the execution or whatever with the no fly list. However this is, IMO a stupid debate anyways as gun advocates would be against a list denyig gun sales even if it was transparent and adhered to due process. Trying to link gun sale denial with the no fly list was DOA for good reason. Silly horse to hitch your cart to.

---