This makes me sick - Connecticut Shooting

Morgan Freeman did not write those heartfelt thoughts on Facebook about Sandy Hook
By Danny Bowes | Movie Talk – 10 hours ago

First Snopes debunked it, now Morgan Freeman himself has stated that the widely-circulated quote condemning the media's response to the Newtown, CT tragedy is, in fact, not from him. The statement took the media to task for the manner in which they cover mass shootings, claiming that it glorifies the killers and gave other disturbed individuals an incentive to follow suit. The fact that the statement purported to be from the beloved, Academy Award-winning 75 year old actor led to it being posted and re-posted far and wide the Internet over, which led some to become suspicious of the quote's true source. This is not the first political stance misattributed to Freeman: in September, a quote from a Twitter parody account featuring Freeman's photo condemning homophobia was widely attributed to the actor himself, in spite of clear indications—the spelling of the account, the profanity it employed—that it was not him.

Why Morgan Freeman, and why do so many people believe these quotes are him? As it turns out, the original author of the quote, which originated as a Facebook post about the Newtown shooting, commented, "If I know the Internet, someone will attribute the quote to Morgan Freeman or Betty White and it'll go viral." Leaving Betty White aside, someone did attribute the quote to Morgan Freeman, and it did go viral, which speaks to the body of work he's amassed as an actor, during the course of which he has played countless wise old sages, the President of the United States, and God.

It also speaks to the collective desire of a shocked and mourning nation for comfort. If thoughts a lot of people are thinking anyway are spoken by an actor as singularly beloved for as particular a kind of role as Morgan Freeman, one can not be blamed for wishing it were so. But, all the same, we should always check the sources of our information.

Even if he had said it, doesn't change the fact guns are a problem.

Plenty of people buy guns like this guys mother thinking it is for protection but it seems like far more often someone winds up shooting themselves in the face or someone else in some domestic argument rather than some masked intruder. Like I said in my earlier post, don't you see the tragic irony of this mother? Shot in the face with the very gun she bought for herself to make herself feel safer? Had she owned no guns in her home there is a chance she would still be alive today. And yet they keep saying that more guns are the answer. If only all the teachers at the school were armed? Are you fn kidding?!

Gun safety is a myth. Having a gun in your home greatly increases your odds of you or someone in your family being killed by it. Much more than the odds of you shooting someone who broke in and tried to kidnap your daughter.

Real life isn't the movie Taken. Lets see some numbers of how many crimes and or criminals were stopped by armed civilians vs how many people die in gun related accidents & crimes.

Doesn't seem worth it to me at all.
 
C_nate said:
Gun safety is a myth. Having a gun in your home greatly increases your odds of you or someone in your family being killed by it.

Your not speaking whole truths my friend. Yes the chance of a gun going off in home with no gun in it is non but that doesnt mean having one in your home means it will happen. IM not here to bicker with you about gun safety im just here to tell people mental health and drug safety is a issue that should be focused on.


But because you asked specifically
282584_391028274319220_1918027498_n.jpg


Whatever your reply is bless your heart but im not going to focus on this thread anymore than to present mental health, safety of drugs, and the effects of the media as a issue.
 
Yeah, kill the bad guys before they kill you. I'm afraid too many action movies has deluded people into believing this NRA bullshit.

Sourdeez, for every 1 psycho that was stopped with a gun, 100 more were successful. Obviously the fact that a difference was made should be commended. But if we stop handing out guns to psychos we can reduce those 100 who were successful. Case in point, you posted one story from God knows when, C-Nate posted several over just the last couple days during the aftermath of a horrible massacre.

Fucking gun clingers go on and on how owning a gun is your right yet they offer NOTHING when it comes to reducing gun violence. Instead it's all about how people kill people. Well if people kill people let's stop handing out guns you morons.

Heads. In. Sand.
 
But to focus on the mental health aspect only is also not speaking whole truths.

Guns need to be focused on because they are the go to tool for anyone, mentally ill or not, who wants to kill as many people as possible.

And for every example you dig up about some armed civilian saving the day, you can dig up a half dozen or more example of people shooting themselves by accident or each other in cold blood. Like I said, Compare the numbers and honestly ask yourself if it seems like it is working the way its supposed to.
 
I can agree a total picture needs to be viewed but im not sure if everyone would be as aberrant as you guys seem when they see the real total picture(guns, mental health, society, etc.) and I don't think all people are sticking their heads in the sand although I will say gun owners can at times(a lot of times) be just as aberrant about gun control issues.

Bless everyone who shows that they actually care. Its better than the apathy that has been a disease on our country up until recent years and I mean on a lot more than just this issue.
 
No, to say that there is nothing wrong with handing out guns to anyone who asks for one is burying your head in the sand,

Typically, there are approximately 30,000 US deaths due to firearms in the US each year.

48,676 people were intentionally shot who survived.

You would think those are the lucky ones. But what are some effects from being shot? Paralyzation, disfigurement, and mental stress to name just a couple. Even if you survive a gunshot it can still ruin your life forever.

Moving on.

18,610 people were unintentionally shot who survived.
17,352 suicides (intentionally shot themselves who died)
12,632 criminal firearm deaths (killed in a crime by guns)
This does not include deaths of people intentionally or unintentionally shot for legal reasons (Like the police shooting a suspect).
The above total is 97270 people shot in the US in 2007. About a third (29984) died, and it is likely that the total number of Americans shot is at least 100,000 given that all types of gunshot injuries/deaths are not included.

Using just the numbers above, a little math indicates that in the US, every day during 2007. AT LEAST 266 Americans were shot. Every day, a third of them (82 daily) died.

Oh, but someone stops a guy once every few months so there's nothing wrong with any of these facts.

If the second amendment was there to protect you, then it would be protecting you. NEWSFLASH, it's not.



http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_peop ... _in_the_US
 
Wes said:
No, to say that there is nothing wrong with handing out guns to anyone who asks for one is burying your head in the sand,

I never said we should give guns to just anyone who wants one. Remember im talking about total picture and systems approach. That includes reasonable restrictions while also addressing other factors other than just guns. Your going as far as to point to things Im not actually saying.

I would argue about the suicide numbers as I think its just as easy to hang oneself but that argument is really just getting off course.I will agree some suicides people try to take other people out as to be remembered as a monster rather than a nobody. like I said this isn't about just guns to me and I still don't think there should be a complete ban of guns from all of society. I just dont believe in being on the one extreme, complete banning of guns, or the other extreme, everyone gets to strap up no matter what other factors there are.
 
Wondering why we're clinging onto our guns. I'm still no fan of laws that take away our rights, but I've also never hunted my meals a day in my life. Unless my refrigerator grows a pair of legs and an attitude, I think I'll be okay without hunting.
Is gun ownership something our parents instill in us early, like religion or political affiliations?
 
Phew ok... a couple of days passed and Wes pretty much said what i wanted to say (he's awesome that way). But still,i want to bring an "exception" to the shooting cases we are bringing here. It was during a cold day in march 2012, a scooter was stolen and some kids in a Jewish private school were out in recess.

Mohamed Merah.

Remember his name cause the french will never forget. American folks don't recall that story much, not because it happen in France, but because it was during the G.O.P's "super Tuesday". Even though Obama and Hilary gave a minute of silence to the victims, the U.S media had other cats to fry it seems. I recall a segment on CNN and fox news totally distorting the news and experts called it a "predictable terrorist act". Still, let's look into him and see if we can learn something after last week shootings.
Mohamed Merah wasn't in any drug related condition (don't forget health care is universal in France, you can pretty much walk in a clinic with empty pockets and walk out no problem like a boss), he was under watch by the authority after he seek his "contacts" with Al-qaida. He had both legal owned weapons and illegal weaponry in his domicile (rumors said he wanted to train people), he had a suicidal history, he tried to join the french army and the foreign legion but was rejected... So he went out to do one of the bloodiest shooting in french history against jewish kids (unarmed) ... then against french soldiers (armed).

After a 30 hours shooting, yes i did say 30 hours, he was finally brought down by parachutists in an almost 5 wanted stars GTA like scenario complete with the middle finger as his dying gesture. It must be said that many times before march 2012, the french authority wanted to arrest him for his violent behavior but was either released after insufficient evidence or because... well... the gun law, tough strict in France, isn't enforced enough for his case. After all, he had a receipt for his weapon (most of them).

You may say that this proves that gun laws had no effect when it comes to prevent this crazed killer, saying that, i can assure you, will only loose sympathy from the victims (and the french) no matter the number of time you will give your hearts and feeling to them. They will only hear insults. Now, you can say that this man was a "special case" and that he was an Arab (don't even go there) who acted like a radical Islamic terrorist seeing how successful he was with his plan, all french intelligence reports proved he had no relation with any terrorist cell whatsoever, he was just alone and insane. They even found out he left the country and search unsuccessfully for Al Qaeda contacts then afterward he tried to join the french army or any "gun wielding organization" like he said to his closest friends, his criminal records prevented him. His buddies even said they were worried cause he constantly mumbled he wanted to kill something. He found no way to kill "legally" in the end...

...Instead, he only found guns either with a permit or in the black market. He armed himself like a commando complete with grenades and automatic rifles, grew a deep hatred against society and created a crazy made-up conspiracy against his Arabic roots. All in one day, he shot Imad Ibn-Ziaten (who was also muslim like Merah), a french soldier who though off duty, was in uniform and armed at the time of his death. Stole his scooter then gunned down some Jewis, including the death of a teacher and three kids. The next few days, he targeted police officers and soldiers sent to bring back order. His killing and his crazy 30 hours long arrest has promoted his case from "Random shooting" to "terrorism". To this day, the survivors and the family of the victims agrees, the swat team that lead the raid agrees, Mohamed Merah's family who tried to talk him down from his madness also agrees, Merah was insane and if there were more prevention in any way, the massacre could of been avoided.

Gun. Must. Not. Roam. Free.

And now i bring this sad but uplifting story from an interview of Imad Ibn-Ziaten's mother whose son was the soldier and the first victim of the shooting. She gave a lesson about how anyone should react to shootings in general.
It came to me, i wanted to know who was Merah. Where does he live? Who was he? and also why? So when i went to the bloc [he grew up in], I found some youths siting down. I assure you it was horrid just horrid. What i saw it will always stay with me. I asked them, "Do you know who Mohamed Merah was?" and right after, they laughed at me and high-fived each other. "But Madam, you don't know who Mohamed Merah was? He was a martyr! A hero of islam!" I was in disbelief. I presented myself to them, "See before you, i am Imad Ibn-Ziaten's mother, the first soldier and victim to die before Merah. Do you have any idea what is happening to me? Are you aware of what i am going trough?" Right after, they changed attitude. They were ashamed, crying even. "Madam... we are sorry... we didn't know!" So we sat down and talked for nearly an hour. We exchange our stories and our problems and that's when it struck me: they need our help. Unless we come to them and aid their situation in their location. The racism, their economic problems, the social inequality, there will always be another "Mohamed Mera". I saw their tearful eyes. I am Muslim and i was afraid of them but i pitied them. Unless we, as a people, make more restrictions and we come to the help of the needed, there will always be more shootings and more victims.
The quotation is at 0:41 of this video (sorry, only in french, still looking for an English version) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww8zWD1HcFM

She started a movement to help the needed, stop anti-semitism and racism altogether and even help the poor on the side. Want to stop tragedies? I say, be inspired by her, go out and prevent desperation, stop being worried about freedom or security. Instead share your love. I ain't a religious man but i will end with the mother of the victim's word to the press, "Inchalla".
 
So say that the U.S. government did pass a law that ban guns. How are they going to enforce the law? Guns don't magically disappear in people's homes once the law is enacted.

I'm actually neutral on the subject. It's one thing to pass a law but enforcing it is another matter.
 
^You own a registered firearm. The government has your address. *knock - knock*. Do not return it, fine, you get fined and your wages garnished. No hunting license, no travel, no vehicle registration, potential jail-time for possession of an illegal firearm (then we confiscate it while your in the klink), or if you manage to evade the recall and you wind up killing someone with your illegal weapon you suffer the maximum penalty under the law. Simple

These are just a few options available until the alternative arrives and you really want to make a stink.
swat_vehicle_arv_cbrne.jpg


One thing GTA has taught me - unless you have a death wish, when these people show up you comply. The state has the right to enforce their own laws and you currently live under their jurisdiction. If you do not wish to comply, please vacate to a country that allows you to live a more suitable lifestyle. Or don't let the bill pass. Charlton Heston's over my cold dead body might be the route some people go - but not a majority.

Why do people always think the government's first response is to rip it out of your hands. Local municipalities are doing cash for guns programs (no questions asked) all over and those yield AMAZING results.

I wonder how many people will put up a fight.. Secretly, I'm hoping they do. :twisted:
Wes said:
I'm afraid too many action movies has deluded people into believing this NRA bullshit.
 
UrbanMasque said:
Why do people always think the government's first response is to rip it out of your hands. Local municipalities are doing cash for guns programs (no questions asked) all over and those yield AMAZING results.

Cash buyback programs have been hugely successful when they've been done. Australia did this some years ago, and ended up removing 600,000 plus firearms from circulation, and cut gun ownership by one-fifth.
 
NickKmet said:
UrbanMasque said:
Why do people always think the government's first response is to rip it out of your hands. Local municipalities are doing cash for guns programs (no questions asked) all over and those yield AMAZING results.

Cash buyback programs have been hugely successful when they've been done. Australia did this some years ago, and ended up removing 600,000 plus firearms from circulation, and cut gun ownership by one-fifth.

They've kinda been considered a joke where I live. They did one this summer (or maybe the summer before) and the guns turned in were largely broken or useless and a number of others were suspected to have been used in unsolved crimes and murders.

Though they did learn from past mistakes and handed out giftcards this time since in the past, the money was put back towards more guns.
 
WickedLiquid said:
ITT we have

Wes
homersimpson.jpg


VS

Gun-Clingers
Georgebush.jpg


In the end, the Wes won and the gun-clingers GTFO of Springfield (GR).

"Are you saying you and Barbara are two bad neighbours?"
"NO! The boy's name is Bart, I don't know the name of the man. BAR! WHAT'S THE MAN'S NAME?"
"I'm not getting involved George."
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
16,689
Messages
270,785
Members
97,724
Latest member
Danywigle
Top