RP Listener Forum - Radio Paradise - eclectic commercial free Internet radio
[ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Breaking News - 2cats - Sep 2, 2014 - 10:33am
 
Private messages in a public forum - n4ku - Sep 2, 2014 - 10:19am
 
Chernobyl - DaveInVA - Sep 2, 2014 - 10:12am
 
How's the weather? - Prodigal_SOB - Sep 2, 2014 - 10:03am
 
Spambags on RP - ScottN - Sep 2, 2014 - 9:57am
 
Questions. - cc_rider - Sep 2, 2014 - 9:22am
 
Celebrity Face Recognition - DaveInVA - Sep 2, 2014 - 9:08am
 
Yet another quiz - Prodigal_SOB - Sep 2, 2014 - 8:40am
 
iPod Nano!! - DaveInVA - Sep 2, 2014 - 8:30am
 
What Makes You Sad? - K_Love - Sep 2, 2014 - 8:24am
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Sep 2, 2014 - 8:01am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - lily34 - Sep 2, 2014 - 7:41am
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - RichardPrins - Sep 2, 2014 - 7:29am
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - miamizsun - Sep 2, 2014 - 7:22am
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - Coaxial - Sep 2, 2014 - 6:54am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Coaxial - Sep 2, 2014 - 6:46am
 
Will you drive this car for dating with ur girl? - Proclivities - Sep 2, 2014 - 6:30am
 
Those Lovable Policemen - sirdroseph - Sep 2, 2014 - 6:28am
 
Cute Dog Video - sirdroseph - Sep 2, 2014 - 5:54am
 
Things You Thought Today - lily34 - Sep 2, 2014 - 5:33am
 
What makes you smile? - Coaxial - Sep 2, 2014 - 5:28am
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - lily34 - Sep 2, 2014 - 5:19am
 
Celebrity Deaths - sirdroseph - Sep 2, 2014 - 5:18am
 
Sweet horrible irony. - sirdroseph - Sep 2, 2014 - 4:50am
 
Name My Band - Steely_D - Sep 1, 2014 - 7:33pm
 
Cookware? - Alexandra - Sep 1, 2014 - 6:44pm
 
Beer - DaveInVA - Sep 1, 2014 - 6:03pm
 
Amazing animals! - haresfur - Sep 1, 2014 - 4:12pm
 
Flower Pictures - Antigone - Sep 1, 2014 - 4:04pm
 
Top 10 things you didn't know about death - Steely_D - Sep 1, 2014 - 4:04pm
 
RP Daily Trivia Challenge - Manbird - Sep 1, 2014 - 3:16pm
 
• • •  BACON • • •  - DaveInVA - Sep 1, 2014 - 3:15pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos; Please Limit to 510 ... - n4ku - Sep 1, 2014 - 2:55pm
 
What are you doing RIGHT NOW? - 2cats - Sep 1, 2014 - 1:53pm
 
Regarding cats - DaveInVA - Sep 1, 2014 - 12:24pm
 
I don't know what to call this but I found it and it's funny - DaveInVA - Sep 1, 2014 - 11:53am
 
NETFLIX - DaveInVA - Sep 1, 2014 - 10:12am
 
RPeep News You Should Know - miamizsun - Sep 1, 2014 - 8:46am
 
BBQers! - miamizsun - Sep 1, 2014 - 8:44am
 
Counting with Pictures - ZM_Herb - Sep 1, 2014 - 8:01am
 
Today in History - ScottN - Sep 1, 2014 - 6:48am
 
~*Funny Cats*~ - DaveInVA - Sep 1, 2014 - 6:41am
 
The Best Web Schmingus Ever - ScottN - Aug 31, 2014 - 8:45pm
 
What did you have for dinner? - bokey - Aug 31, 2014 - 8:44pm
 
Funny Videos - DaveInVA - Aug 31, 2014 - 5:59pm
 
All Dogs Go To Heaven - Dog Pix - Antigone - Aug 31, 2014 - 5:58pm
 
Quotations - Antigone - Aug 31, 2014 - 5:56pm
 
Predictions - kurtster - Aug 31, 2014 - 5:54pm
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - ScottFromWyoming - Aug 31, 2014 - 5:12pm
 
Best Song Comments. - ScottFromWyoming - Aug 31, 2014 - 5:11pm
 
Movie quotes used as life's truisms - Steely_D - Aug 31, 2014 - 3:38pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - PoundPuppy - Aug 31, 2014 - 2:03pm
 
Things I Saw Today... - oldviolin - Aug 31, 2014 - 12:06pm
 
HALF A WORLD - oldviolin - Aug 31, 2014 - 11:03am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Aug 31, 2014 - 10:42am
 
Antiques - Antigone - Aug 31, 2014 - 9:25am
 
The War On You - DaveInVA - Aug 31, 2014 - 8:17am
 
Stuff I've Said Out Loud - Antigone - Aug 31, 2014 - 6:46am
 
Education - Red_Dragon - Aug 31, 2014 - 6:27am
 
Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore - haresfur - Aug 30, 2014 - 11:15pm
 
Poetry Forum - ScottN - Aug 30, 2014 - 4:00pm
 
Palestine - ScottN - Aug 30, 2014 - 3:53pm
 
Those lovable NSA/GCHQ/CSEC/DGSE/ASD/CIA guys - RichardPrins - Aug 30, 2014 - 2:29pm
 
Greatest opening lyrics - Alexandra - Aug 30, 2014 - 11:10am
 
Things that piss me off - bokey - Aug 30, 2014 - 9:44am
 
Why are ALL RPeeps determined to find cause to argue in e... - Red_Dragon - Aug 30, 2014 - 9:40am
 
Facebook Tips - Alexandra - Aug 30, 2014 - 9:34am
 
Maps • Google • GeoGuessr - thedoctork - Aug 29, 2014 - 11:51pm
 
~ Have a good joke you can post? ~ - K_Love - Aug 29, 2014 - 10:24pm
 
• • • What Makes You Happy? • • •  - PoundPuppy - Aug 29, 2014 - 5:23pm
 
What do you want to drive? - DaveInVA - Aug 29, 2014 - 4:22pm
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - ScottFromWyoming - Aug 29, 2014 - 1:50pm
 
Make me a stereo system! (poof!!) - DaveInVA - Aug 29, 2014 - 12:26pm
 
Coffee - miamizsun - Aug 29, 2014 - 12:13pm
 
songs that ROCK! - Sean-E-Sean - Aug 29, 2014 - 12:12pm
 
(a public service of RP)
Index » Regional/Local » USA/Canada » Guns Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 384, 385, 386  Next
Post to this Topic
ScottFromWyoming
I eat pints.
ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Pisces
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Aug 28, 2014 - 2:04pm

 K_Love wrote:

Okay, fine.

 
I was just amused that they re-tasked some tot-loks to make those. We have 'em on our kitchen cabinets...
K_Love

K_Love Avatar

Gender: Female
Zodiac: Scorpio
Chinese Yr: Cock


Posted: Aug 28, 2014 - 2:02pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

so make one:

Tot-lok

 
Okay, fine.
ScottFromWyoming
I eat pints.
ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Pisces
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Aug 28, 2014 - 10:30am

 K_Love wrote:
OOOOOoooooh, I want the 1410 (2nd one)!

 

 
so make one:

Tot-lok
K_Love

K_Love Avatar

Gender: Female
Zodiac: Scorpio
Chinese Yr: Cock


Posted: Aug 28, 2014 - 10:14am

OOOOOoooooh, I want the 1410 (2nd one)!

 


sirdroseph
Endeavor to Perservere
sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Sagittarius
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Aug 21, 2014 - 9:52am

Huey P. Newton Gun Club Pushes #BlackOpenCarry to Protest Police Violence
sirdroseph
Endeavor to Perservere
sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Sagittarius
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Aug 6, 2014 - 8:57am


DaveInVA
Single, unwanted, unloved eccentric, crusty ol' fart with cats
DaveInVA Avatar

Location: In a hovel in effluent Damnville, VA
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Leo
Chinese Yr: Buffalo


Posted: Jul 26, 2014 - 4:50pm

EMILY MILLER: Federal judge rules DC ban on gun carry rights unconstitutional


miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 23, 2014 - 1:31pm

apparently this is what a silencer on a shotgun sounds like


Lazy8
human
Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 16, 2014 - 11:03pm

aflanigan wrote:
I did make an objection. See the link in my previous post.
The lady claiming 52 DGUs in a year was simply exemplary of the manifold problems associated with self-reported data.

See HERE (I understand Kleck has taken exception with Hemenway's opinion of his survey data in his 2000 book Armed, but haven't been able to find an abstract of his criticisms; perhaps you can summarize?), and a more recent revision of the same critique, seemingly published after Kleck's book, HERE

Have a safe weekend!


Sorry to take so long to get back to this, been some life going on. Plus I had to read some papers.

This response from Kleck to Hemenway, for instance. It wasn't that hard to find. It's a good read, and it lays bare some of the confirmation bias (and just plain political bias) in some of the attacks on Kleck and his work. Its tone is a little strident; perhaps understandable given the vilification Kleck and his coauthors received after the publication of thier first survey.

To Hemenway's strongest point, that the survey data likely overestimate the number of wounded attackers Kleck has some solid arguments: namely that there are likely to be errors in both directions. In some of the jurisdictions people were surveyed in defending yourself with a weapon is a crime. Anybody who answered in the positive would have to overcome the suspicion that their answer would not be kept confidential. The upside to being truthful for the respondent is vanishingly small; the downside is the possibility of a long stretch in prison. Not an incentive to overreport.

Similarly Hemenway's assumption that every wounded attacker would show up in emergency room statistics is naive at best. Criminals (especially career criminals) would be aware that that emergency room visit would be reported to the police. They have a very strong incentive to avoid that.

I will readily concede that a good many of those who said they wounded an attacker may be wrong. Hitting something that isn't standing still (and may be armed as well), likely in the dark, and very much interested in not being hit is harder than it looks on TV. Hitting a man-sized target at the shooting range in good light with both hands on the gun and nothing at stake is hard enough that it regularly humiliates people. Doing that under stress, with no time to prepare, after interrupted sleep is much harder. That could also account for some of the "missing" wounded. But does that mean that nothing happened that night at all? An encounter where a shot was fired would be pretty traumatic and hard to forget. Overestimating one's prowess with a gun that night you shot at an intruder is a lot more likely than misremembering whether or not you shot at an intruder at all.
 
Data has noise in it. This is unavoidable. We have no way but surveys to collect this data. This isn't a new problem or one unique to this issue. Noise puts error bars around the data, but it doesn't make it go away.

You probably won't read the link above. It's a long article and you won't agree with its conclusions. I'll just quote a snippet here:

            The NSDS estimates were subsequently strongly confirmed by yet another large-sample national survey, sponsored by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), and conducted under the auspices of the Police Foundation. We can be certain that Hemenway knew about this survey because he served on the NIJ Advisory Committee for the project and was thanked for his comments on a draft of the grant report describing the survey’s findings, including its DGU estimates (Cook and Ludwig 1997, p. x). Kleck was the principle consultant on the Police Foundation survey, wrote most of the associated grant proposal and most of the questionnaire, and participated in numerous meetings with Hemenway and Cook.

            Hemenway did not mention the results of this survey in his critique, perhaps for an understandable reason: it almost exactly confirmed the NSDS results. The NSDS yielded an estimate of 2.55 million DGUs, using a person-based one-year estimate (Kleck and Gertz 1995, p. 184). The most comparable estimate generated by the Police Foundation survey was 2.45 million, well within sampling error of the NSDS estimate. Many variants of this estimate were even higher (Cook and Ludwig 1997, p. 62).

Hemenway himself had ample opportunity, as a member of the Advisory Committee, to suggest solutions to problems he saw in this survey, or to suggest other steps “to reduce the bias or to validate the findings by external measures,” and to show that DGUs are really far less common than so many surveys have indicated. When the Police Foundation survey almost exactly confirmed the NSDS results, Hemenway’s response was to suddenly decide that surveys inevitably overstate DGU frequency.

This appears to be a very recent revelation to Hemenway. In repeated and prolonged meetings of the Advisory Committee in 1994, during which the members discussed at length the long series of questions asking about DGUs, Hemenway did not once share his remarkable theory that all that effort was for naught, and that surveys could not generate even approximately accurate estimates of DGU frequency.

Philip Cook, who also served on the same committee, likewise underwent the same sudden conversion, after the Police Foundation survey yielded DGU estimates every bit as large as those of the NSDS and earlier surveys. Since no new evidence bearing on the ability of surveys to estimate this parameter had come to light since 1994, one can only wonder how and why these revelations came so belatedly to Cook and Hemenway. Cynics might suspect that, metaphorically speaking, once they found they could not win the game, they decided to take their ball and go home.




aflanigan
Be ashamed to die until you have won some victory for humanity
aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Aquarius
Chinese Yr: Rat


Posted: Jul 9, 2014 - 1:07pm

 DaveInVA wrote: 

So, which logical fallacy is this a classic example of?

No cheating by looking in the textbook
RichardPrins
Anti-Procrustean
RichardPrins Avatar



Posted: Jul 9, 2014 - 12:25pm

 kurtster wrote:
And lastly, your Marx quote ... Far out !  I learned something or maybe had been reminded of something once learned but long forgotten.  Either way, its cool.

What I would ask of you, since that was a very early Marx quote, did he ever modify that after a passing of time and evolution ?
 
I have no reason to believe he changed his mind. A case in point would be to look at Lenin who, some 60+ years later, wrote:

(...) Yet now of all times, at the present revolutionary moment, it is most urgent and essential that there be a universal arming of the people. To assert that, while we have a revolutionary army, there is no need to arm the proletariat, or that there would “not be enough” arms to go round, is mere deception and trickery. The thing is to begin organising a universal militia straight away, so that everyone should learn the use of arms even if there is “not enough” to go round, for it is not at all necessary that the people have enough weapons to arm everybody. The people must learn, one and all, how to use arms, they must belong, one and all, to the militia which is to replace the police and the standing army.

The workers do not want an army standing apart from the people; what they want is that the workers and soldiers should merge into a single militia consisting of all the people. (...)
Of course when you spoke of The Left, you were talking about the U.S. Left, which, certainly by now, is anything but left (they are predominantly centrists at best and far, far removed from anything resembling socialism, despite the fear-mongering of ultra-conservatives). Also the salient point from the earlier post was that the gun control was in fact enacted by what might be called The Right (i.e. Republicans in the guise of one Mr. Reagan along with an accomplice) and was unrelated to the anti-war movement...
DaveInVA
Single, unwanted, unloved eccentric, crusty ol' fart with cats
DaveInVA Avatar

Location: In a hovel in effluent Damnville, VA
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Leo
Chinese Yr: Buffalo


Posted: Jul 9, 2014 - 11:59am

Murder rate drops as concealed carry permits rise, study claims


kurtster
ignore the kitteh behind the kurtain
kurtster Avatar

Location: counting flowers on the wall ...
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Libra
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Jun 28, 2014 - 6:07am

 RichardPrins wrote:
So everything was peachy keen in the 50s and 60s and people still trusted the government, though perhaps a tad less if you happened to be coloured (which still seems largely the case today).

But it was about guns, California, and of course those despicable unpatriotic anti-war leftists who took away your right to parade a gun...

All of that piqued my curiosity and via some specialized ideological literature led me to the curious, but prominently highlighted, case of...
The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill prohibiting the public carrying of loaded firearms. Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, the bill garnered national attention after the Black Panthers marched on the California Capitol to protest the bill. The bill was signed by Republican California Governor Ronald Reagan and became California penal code 12031 and 171(c).
and from there to
It began shortly after the shooting of Denzil Dowell. Easy Bay legislator Don Mulford introduced a bill to repeal the law that permitted citizens to carry loaded weapons in public places so long as the weapons were openly displayed {see link to California Penal Code, Sections 12031 and 171.c}. What the Mulford law sought to achieve was the elimination of the Black Panther Police Patrols, and it had been tagged "the Panther Bill" by the media. (...)
No mention of war, but plenty of context in the Civil Rights struggle for some part of the population (and not universally liked, to put it mildly)... Further context by Malcolm X:
“Last but not least, I must say this concerning the great controversy over rifles and shotguns. White people been buying rifles all their lives…no commotion. The only thing I’ve ever said is that in areas where the government has proven itself either unwilling or unable to defend the lives and the property of Negroes, it’s time for Negroes to defend themselves. Article number two of the Constitutional amendments provides you and me the right to own a rifle or a shotgun. It is constitutionally legal to own a shotgun or a rifle. This doesn’t mean you’re going to get a rifle and form battalions and go out looking for white folks, although you’d be within your rights – I mean, you’d be justified; but that would be illegal and we don’t do anything illegal. If the white man doesn’t want the black man buying rifles and shotguns, then let the government do its job.”
Finally, to finish up and address your compulsive crypto-fascist slandering of all things left, I'll leave you with a nice quote from Satan himself (though removed from a larger class context): {#Mrgreen}

“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.”

Karl Marx, March, 1850


 
Briefly, it does not undermine my position, it actually reinforces it.

More later when I return home.
.
So much to go over, but very little at the same time.  My timeline has been pinpointed as to the end of open carry in California of which I recollect and have related, yet though off by a couple of years is still being called unbelievable by those who were yet to be born or were not there to witness it first hand.  No one has come up with any historical references to counter my recollections.  Nor have any here who lived there at the same time as I.  And there are some here at RP.  They are free to speak their mind.

The only reason I mentioned California in the first place was to put some perspective in the timeline and how different things were just 50 years ago and in inconceivable ways to people from other places and ages in the US and abroad.  There is still Alaska and the western Canadian provinces and territories with similar recent histories of lasting pioneer ways that would seem to come from a dusty book 100 or more years old yet are only 50 years old and maybe less.  Remember that the transistor was invented in 1945 IIRC which was less than 70 years ago.  And look what has happened since in such a short time.

On to Mulford and Malcolm.  Mulford only confirms my timeline by providing an end point for the way of life I have described.  I set out to do two things.  a) present the gun debate in terms yet to be recognized in this thread and b) attempt to tie it into the anti war movement.  In the process I brought up points to make my points.  I kept it brief, cuz to try and rehash the 60's in a couple of sentences or paragraph's is just plain impossible.  However on Malcolm and the Civil Rights movement of the 60's and even the Black Panthers, I did at least acknowledge it, though it was glossed over by nearly everyone.

 
 kurtster wrote:


What changed between that not so long ago time and now ?   I really don't know.  I do recall however, that sentiment towards guns changed shortly after JFK was shot.  Somehow guns became a touchy subject.  Then RFK and MLK went down.  And Viet Nam and the baby killing soldiers at My Lai.  That is when the Left latched onto gun control for keeps.  They used it against the Negro before to keep him down.
.

.

 kurtster wrote:

Funny you should mention that as I was born in Berkeley and moved to Newport Beach (in Orange County) as a young teenager in 1964.  I have experienced it first hand and during the war in Viet Nam.  Mario Savio was known to me as he was having his moment as I lived only blocks from the campus of UC (both my parents are alums), as was Angela Davis and the original Hell's Angels, yada. yada.  But what then ?  You could say or agree that I have seen and experienced a lot just living in those two unique places in that unique time that few have ever seen, except those that were there.  Maybe its why I sometimes contradict myself and knowingly, having lived the dichotomy.

Anyway, we can pick this up later.  No one is going anywhere. 

So let's talk about the American Negro or the "coloured" as you said.  I am aware of that history, well aware of that history and have brought it up in other threads for other reasons.  So here is a very interesting summary of what I have long tried to bring to the discussions here ...

The Dark Secret of Jim Crow and the Racist Roots of Gun Control

By Dave Kopel


Feel free to try and impeach the author.  Here I'll help ...
I think that covers your concerns on the Civil Rights part of your reply and shows that I did at least acknowledge it as a component.

.
So back to my a).  I have made the case about the debate itself and its dishonesty and one of the functions of the 2nd Amendment to anticipate it.  Defending guns is the position of defending a negative which is impossible.  The Left created a litmus test to work around that and undermine the defense of the gun rights.  The whole method of debate is unfair and guarantees the eventual end of the 2nd Amendment by means of a death of a thousand cuts.

And on b) well I may have more to do to build that case.  But it is not a major concern really.  a) is what matters most.

And lastly, your Marx quote ... Far out !  I learned something or maybe had been reminded of something once learned but long forgotten.  Either way, its cool.

What I would ask of you, since that was a very early Marx quote, did he ever modify that after a passing of time and evolution ?

Thank you for your reply which adds to the discussion in a positive way and further allowed me to reinforce the case I have been making.



RichardPrins
Anti-Procrustean
RichardPrins Avatar



Posted: Jun 27, 2014 - 7:58pm

 kurtster wrote:
California... yadda, yadda, yadda....
(...) And also a reminder, my main point is the anti gun movement was born from the anti war movement, not from the establishment based crime and punishment view.
 
So everything was peachy keen in the 50s and 60s and people still trusted the government, though perhaps a tad less if you happened to be coloured (which still seems largely the case today).

But it was about guns, California, and of course those despicable unpatriotic anti-war leftists who took away your right to parade a gun...

All of that piqued my curiosity and via some specialized ideological literature led me to the curious, but prominently highlighted, case of...
The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill prohibiting the public carrying of loaded firearms. Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, the bill garnered national attention after the Black Panthers marched on the California Capitol to protest the bill. The bill was signed by Republican California Governor Ronald Reagan and became California penal code 12031 and 171(c).
and from there to
It began shortly after the shooting of Denzil Dowell. Easy Bay legislator Don Mulford introduced a bill to repeal the law that permitted citizens to carry loaded weapons in public places so long as the weapons were openly displayed {see link to California Penal Code, Sections 12031 and 171.c}. What the Mulford law sought to achieve was the elimination of the Black Panther Police Patrols, and it had been tagged "the Panther Bill" by the media. (...)
No mention of war, but plenty of context in the Civil Rights struggle for some part of the population (and not universally liked, to put it mildly)... Further context by Malcolm X:
“Last but not least, I must say this concerning the great controversy over rifles and shotguns. White people been buying rifles all their lives…no commotion. The only thing I’ve ever said is that in areas where the government has proven itself either unwilling or unable to defend the lives and the property of Negroes, it’s time for Negroes to defend themselves. Article number two of the Constitutional amendments provides you and me the right to own a rifle or a shotgun. It is constitutionally legal to own a shotgun or a rifle. This doesn’t mean you’re going to get a rifle and form battalions and go out looking for white folks, although you’d be within your rights – I mean, you’d be justified; but that would be illegal and we don’t do anything illegal. If the white man doesn’t want the black man buying rifles and shotguns, then let the government do its job.”
Finally, to finish up and address your compulsive crypto-fascist slandering of all things left, I'll leave you with a nice quote from Satan himself (though removed from a larger class context): {#Mrgreen}

“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.”

- Karl Marx, March, 1850

kurtster
ignore the kitteh behind the kurtain
kurtster Avatar

Location: counting flowers on the wall ...
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Libra
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Jun 27, 2014 - 7:34pm

So do we want to talk about guns ?

Or did I make a point that cannot be challenged ? 

later ... g'nite
kurtster
ignore the kitteh behind the kurtain
kurtster Avatar

Location: counting flowers on the wall ...
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Libra
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Jun 27, 2014 - 7:11pm

 steeler wrote:

So, not prevalent in Berkeley during your time there?
 

 
What is your point ?  Mine is quite clear.

I didn't have to read books or watch TV to see this stuff.  It was part of my life.  The west was still alive and well and nearby to me growing up.  One did not have to make a special trip to see this stuff.

Just as it was no big deal for you to pass by a working coal mine or steel mill where you grew up, right ? 
steeler
About three bricks shy of a load
steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Jun 27, 2014 - 6:47pm

 kurtster wrote:
 steeler wrote:

Was that in Berkeley?


I will politely add a geography lesson about California to all this.  Not only are some cultural differences unique to the old California I speak of, so is its climate and terrain.  In one state you can encounter all of the climates found throughout the entire world.  From desert heat below sea level, to Arctic environments up on Mt. Whitney.  All in a days drive.


 kurtster wrote: several pages ago

Ok.  Remember I said rural areas, not downtown getting a garden hose.  I just asked the wife if she had the same memories and she agreed. It was common and no big deal. Not in the urban areas, but out in the Tules, ranchlands, deserts and up in the Sierra.  Her family has deep roots up in the NorCal area above Sacramento.  She is a fifth gen native Californian.   By the mid 70's it gets very much less so.  But in the 50's and 60's, hell yes.  Men wearing holstered guns was no big deal in those regions of California and also up in Washington as I recall on a trip to the Seattle World's Fair in 1962 when we made a side trip to eastern Wash to my great uncle's ranch in a place called Wilson Creek, near Spokane.  He was also the Sheriff at the time.

Times are much different now, obviously, but 1970 was just 44 years ago.  And the west coast was much different from the rest of the country back then before the invasion of the easterners.  Running water and indoor toilets were still a luxury in many places out there in those not so long ago days.  And that is my point.  For most alive now, 20 years is a long time ago, with no firsthand visual knowledge of anything past that point in time.  I did use a little hyperbole on the cell phone delio, but in those areas, not really that much of a stretch

And California was much different from Texas back then, too.  Just ask any native Californian or Texan my age or older.  They will likely be more than happy to tell you and point out the differences.  Don't forget the dark side of history when armed Californians patrolled the eastern border of the state looking for Okies during the Dust Bowl era as well.

But just to get back to my point that 40 to 50 years ago is not that long of a time and things were way different there then.  Inconceivably different to a great many people not originally from those parts.

And also a reminder, my main point is the anti gun movement was born from the anti war movement, not from the establishment based crime and punishment view.


 
So, not prevalent in Berkeley during your time there?
 
kurtster
ignore the kitteh behind the kurtain
kurtster Avatar

Location: counting flowers on the wall ...
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Libra
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Jun 27, 2014 - 6:22pm

 steeler wrote:

Was that in Berkeley?


I will politely add a geography lesson about California to all this.  Not only are some cultural differences unique to the old California I speak of, so is its climate and terrain.  In one state you can encounter all of the climates found throughout the entire world.  From desert heat below sea level, to Arctic environments up on Mt. Whitney.  All in a days drive.


 kurtster wrote: several pages ago

Ok.  Remember I said rural areas, not downtown getting a garden hose.  I just asked the wife if she had the same memories and she agreed. It was common and no big deal. Not in the urban areas, but out in the Tules, ranchlands, deserts and up in the Sierra.  Her family has deep roots up in the NorCal area above Sacramento.  She is a fifth gen native Californian.   By the mid 70's it gets very much less so.  But in the 50's and 60's, hell yes.  Men wearing holstered guns was no big deal in those regions of California and also up in Washington as I recall on a trip to the Seattle World's Fair in 1962 when we made a side trip to eastern Wash to my great uncle's ranch in a place called Wilson Creek, near Spokane.  He was also the Sheriff at the time.

Times are much different now, obviously, but 1970 was just 44 years ago.  And the west coast was much different from the rest of the country back then before the invasion of the easterners.  Running water and indoor toilets were still a luxury in many places out there in those not so long ago days.  And that is my point.  For most alive now, 20 years is a long time ago, with no firsthand visual knowledge of anything past that point in time.  I did use a little hyperbole on the cell phone delio, but in those areas, not really that much of a stretch

And California was much different from Texas back then, too.  Just ask any native Californian or Texan my age or older.  They will likely be more than happy to tell you and point out the differences.  Don't forget the dark side of history when armed Californians patrolled the eastern border of the state looking for Okies during the Dust Bowl era as well.

But just to get back to my point that 40 to 50 years ago is not that long of a time and things were way different there then.  Inconceivably different to a great many people not originally from those parts.

And also a reminder, my main point is the anti gun movement was born from the anti war movement, not from the establishment based crime and punishment view.



steeler
About three bricks shy of a load
steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Jun 27, 2014 - 6:11pm

 kurtster wrote:

I will be happy to withstand the scrutiny of backscrolling.

I am not retreating from anything and will remind you of my posted disqualifier that you gloss over ... 

 Up until the 60's, the government was for the most part, trusted; society while far from perfect was basically peaceful and quiet.  Guns in everyday life were not an issue.  Having one and wearing it in the open turned few heads, if any, at least in the West where I grew up in the 50's and 60's.  I'm sure that the Eastern experience was different, being far removed from the days of fighting Indians and foreign invaders and their bloody Civil War.

And you still refuse to address my main point about the honesty of the entire gun debate.

 
Was that in Berkeley?
steeler
About three bricks shy of a load
steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Jun 27, 2014 - 6:10pm

 Lazy8 wrote:
steeler wrote:
What is reasonable in one community may not be in another, true.
.
The District was arguing in Heller that the reasonableness of restrictions should be assessed on the particularities of the community in question.  

The particularities of a community don't trump anybody's rights.

 
The rights are subject to reasonable restrictions, including the Second Amendment.  Heller made that clear in case anyone had his or her doubts.
Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 384, 385, 386  Next