Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
PREDATORS R US heartily endorse disarming the people.
GUN BANS SAVE LIVES - just not of the victims.
You do realize that guns are the best means for weaker folk to defend themselves from the stronger, nastier folk.
Remember, when seconds count, police are minutes (or hours) away. And you can't sue the government for 'failure to protect.' It's up to you, bucko.
Don't be the chalk outline.
I don't think it should be easy to get someone committed - the rule now is you have to be a danger to yourself or others.... Reagan closed down these facilities which had become warehouses people never got out of. And he messed up by not making provisions for the community services for all the people released. REAGAN.
Wrong.
CARTER! Democrats in the 70's began closing the mental hospitals. 1976-77 to be exact. Carter gave them the go ahead. Reagan had no capacity to do anything aboiut it, one way or another. Don't believe everything you read on Yahoo, et al.
In former days, the clown that shot up the school the other day would have been committed (long ago) by any number of witnesses to his psychotic behavior. Seen by a psychiatrist or two, he'd a surely been locked up - probly for a long time. And yes...some schizos don't respond to antipsychotics and yes...it's a lifetime thing. Lotsa things in real life aren't pretty. That's just the way it is.
Oh, please. The parents failed their kids, not the other way around.
Nothing more laughable than listening to aging Boomers whine about "kids these days!" while ignoring the fact that it was their generation that raised them.
When we were young, OUR generation (Boomers) wasn't full of belligerent, behavioral messes that a lot of the young kids are these days. You know why? Because OUR generation was disciplined, not coddled and protected by laws that stopped parents from teaching right from wrong. When WE misbehaved, our parents spanked us, washed our mouths out with soap, some got the belt (which I think is far too harsh), and they grounded us, but it taught us to fear consequences, and to respect them AND authority.
Teachers took no backtalk and if we misbehaved, we were sent to the office where we got the strap if the principal saw fit. Our parents backed the teachers and the principal. Authority was respected.
Fast forward to when we had kids...suddenly the governments decided that we couldn't discipline our children. Spanking was deemed a form of abuse. Our hands were tied and the kids knew it. What were their consequences for misbehaviour? Nothing much at all other than being talked to IF they chose to stick around and listen. How did that work out? The day we had to stop discipline using a physical method if necessary, was the day kids began to walk all over everyone because of the law.
Nowadays, the kids rule the schools, tell the teachers to F off and nothing is done. The parents don't back the teacher or the principal or even lawmakers. The kids grow up doing as they please until some day they commit a crime that they can't just walk away from. Our youth detention centers and prisons are full of them.
You go ahead and laugh, but take a look at us and take a look at the kids these days. Wouldn't you rather be a respectable citizen who learned right from wrong, than a delinquent with no respect for anyone?
It amazes me that intelligent people believe that disarming themselves will stop predators from preying on them. Guns aren't the problem. Predators are.
It amazes me that intelligent people believe that disarming themselves will stop predators from preying on them. Guns aren't the problem. Predators are.
Interesting choice of words. Substitute "Mountain Lions" and see anti-gun people reach for a shotgun. "Nice kitty"
The post your quoting was speaking out against many other students having guns.
I didn't know anyone was suggesting that students have guns.
But yet, it's been suggested. Even then, we'd need to be careful about arming teachers as well. It may attract a wrong type of person if their main incentive is to just to collect the bonus from carrying a gun in class.
Last edited by ackmondual; 02-26-2018 at 09:25 AM..
Reason: Fixed mismatched from what I was quoting
The one thing missing today, and present 50+ years ago (when this junk didn't EVER occur) were psychiatric hospitals with locked doors. Almost anybody could initiate committing a person to one of these places. Competent, properly trained psychiatrists and knowledgeable nursing staff observed all committed people for a period of time until they were convinced whether or not that person could/should be released. That decision had nothing to do whatsoever with the ACLU or any other "self-anointed" bunch. You can thank Jimmah Carter for these shoot-'em-ups. He and his minions closed the psych hospitals as "inhumane." We have now seen the result of "Peanut Brain's" great ideas.
So what's more inhumane? A few dozen schizos, not responding to anti-psychotic drugs, locked up... or 100's of innocent people shot to death? You decide.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reneeh63
Reagan...not Carter.
I don't think it should be easy to get someone committed - the rule now is you have to be a danger to yourself or others.... Reagan closed down these facilities which had become warehouses people never got out of. And he messed up by not making provisions for the community services for all the people released. REAGAN.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinbrookNine
Wrong.
CARTER! Democrats in the 70's began closing the mental hospitals. 1976-77 to be exact. Carter gave them the go ahead. Reagan had no capacity to do anything aboiut it, one way or another. Don't believe everything you read on Yahoo, et al.
In former days, the clown that shot up the school the other day would have been committed (long ago) by any number of witnesses to his psychotic behavior. Seen by a psychiatrist or two, he'd a surely been locked up - probly for a long time. And yes...some schizos don't respond to antipsychotics and yes...it's a lifetime thing. Lotsa things in real life aren't pretty. That's just the way it is.
The Mental Health Systems Act of 1980 (MHSA) was United States legislation signed by President Jimmy Carter which provided grants to community mental health centers. During the following Ronald Reagan administration, the United States Congress repealed most of the law.[1] The MHSA was considered landmark legislation in mental health care policy.
Shutting down the warehouses was needed - it was easy to get your wife committed just on the word of a friendly family doctor.
The problem was that Reagan gutted Carter's plan for the community healthcare needed for those folks who were released - that's why they are in jail or on the streets now. Get your $%*&^ straight.
A big part of a militias duty is to ensure Govt does not become tyrannical, so how could a militia effectively do this while it is that very Govt that is regulating it?
A govt that is tyrannical is never going to just come out and announce themselves to be tyrannical, naturally they are going to try and disguise this, using safety, national security, etc etc.
The types of militia the founding fathers wanted would be very effective at ensuring tyranny never gets a foothold, a militia that is threatening enough to Govt/ military would be enough to ensure Govt does not overstep its bounds imo.
I think this notion is obsolete. How could private citizens hold off the US military which is now armed with everything from tanks to nuclear weapons? That didn't even work way back in the "war of northern aggression" when the country was practically divided in two.
The current US government is already overstepping its bounds. One example: both Ivanka and Jared are currently illegally acting as government officials without required security clearance. Rather than invade DC, I would prefer to vote the rogues out. Voting rights are extremely important to protect. The whole process is far from perfect in modern times (i.e. Russian influence of media) but better than trying to shoot people.
As we progress technologically, we may need new constitutional amendments.
I think this notion is obsolete. How could private citizens hold off the US military which is now armed with everything from tanks to nuclear weapons? That didn't even work way back in the "war of northern aggression" when the country was practically divided in two.
The current US government is already overstepping its bounds. Both Ivanka and Jared are currently illegally acting as government officials without required security clearance. Rather than invading DC, I would prefer to vote the rogues out. Voting rights are extremely important to protect. The whole process is far from perfect in modern times (i.e. Russian influence of media) but better than trying to shoot people.
As we progress technologically, we may need new constitutional amendments.
The people who have this obsolete concept think their actions are more important than the voters, who, quite frankly, outnumber them...and they know it. So they think they are going to bully their way into power.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
