Page 34 of 41 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast
Results 661 to 680 of 820

Thread: Revisiting Gun Laws in the U.S.

  1. #661
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,627
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    Tomorrow I will post the statistics/research on the drug interactions when I have the time to find some of the articles I've read on the subject. Your take on it in the edit is not on par with the research I've read. I believe the chemicals sometimes cause people to do things that they otherwise would not have been inclined to do.
    If you cared about eliminating psychotropics, you would have had the research committed to memory.

  2. #662
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    5,008
    LOL ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Isred.


    I wasn't going to post this (two part video) because I think Alex Jones is a conspiracy wackjob, but it is pretty entertaining, I'm surprised Alex didn't have a coronary. I follow it with a Fox News story that puts out a lot of stats and I also found interesting.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtyKofFih8Y


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=...ture=endscreen



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=tRJ0ls_W9XM
    Last edited by gunnails; 01-09-2013 at 06:26 PM.

  3. #663
    It's funny, people who said "Obama wants to confiscate your guns" were described as insane not that long ago.

    Today, we stand at a point where an Executive Action could do that very thing.

    Such things always make me wonder what else (policy and law wise) that is described as "insane" today will be tomorrows political reality.

  4. #664
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    13,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    It's funny, people who said "Obama wants to confiscate your guns" were described as insane not that long ago.

    Today, we stand at a point where an Executive Action could do that very thing.

    Such things always make me wonder what else (policy and law wise) that is described as "insane" today will be tomorrows political reality.
    +1

    Molon labe.

  5. #665
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    It's funny, people who said "Obama wants to confiscate your guns" were described as insane not that long ago.

    Today, we stand at a point where an Executive Action could do that very thing.

    Such things always make me wonder what else (policy and law wise) that is described as "insane" today will be tomorrows political reality.
    I have not seen any evidence that the potential executive order has anything to do with confiscating privately owned firearms. In fact, such an action would be illegal. Executive orders cannot exceed Constitutional authority or stand in violation of legislation passed by Congress.

    Unlike assassinating American citizens without due process, such an action will simply not be tolerated by a large percentage of Americans.

    In all likelihood, the order will be for stronger enforcement of already existing federal laws. Nothing more, nothing less.

  6. #666
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    I have not seen any evidence that the potential executive order has anything to do with confiscating privately owned firearms. In fact, such an action would be illegal. Executive orders cannot exceed Constitutional authority or stand in violation of legislation passed by Congress.

    Unlike assassinating American citizens without due process, such an action will simply not be tolerated by a large percentage of Americans.

    In all likelihood, the order will be for stronger enforcement of already existing federal laws. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Agreed, its another case of the administration talking big. They could provide more info for background checks in the states that perform them. Not much else is doable at the Federal level without sweeping legislation.

  7. #667
    Quote Originally Posted by isired View Post
    If you cared about eliminating psychotropics, you would have had the research committed to memory.
    http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/heal...gs-327408.html

    It is no secret that prescription drugs, notably antidepressants, can make psychiatric patients worse, not better, and even precipitate violence.

    Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants like Prozac, Zoloft, and Paxil are so linked to violence that they were given the FDA’s highest warning, a black box, in 2004 for the suicidal risks they can create in young adults.

    According to published reports, the gunmen involved in the mass shootings at Columbine High School, Red Lake reservation, Northern Illinois University, and Virginia Tech were under the influence of psychiatric drugs or withdrawing from such drugs.

    About 5,000 news stories link psychiatric drugs to violent crime, including school shootings, according to the website SSRI Stories, where the stories can be read (ssristories.com).

    Three men in their 70s and 80s attack their wives with hammers while under the influence of psychiatric drugs, say news reports on the site. A 54-year-old respiratory patient with a breathing tube and an oxygen tank and no previous criminal record holds up a bank.

    An enraged man in Australia chases his mailman and threatens to cut his throat—for bringing him junk mail. A 58-year-old Amarillo man with no criminal history tries to abduct three people, and an Oklahoma woman accepts a cup of tea from an elderly nurse she’s just met—and kills her.

    “The kind of energy, rage and insanity seen in a lot of crimes today was not seen before SSRIs appeared,” said Rosie Meysenburg, who co-founded SSRI Stories, in an interview shortly before her death this year.

    Meysenburg is not the only one to observe the bizarre, unpredictable, and inexplicable violence that has surfaced since the psychiatric drug craze began 25 years ago with Prozac. Did elderly people commit crimes so frequently in the past? Did people so frequently kill their families?

    During a few weeks in 2009, these events were reported: A Middletown, Md., man was accused of killing his wife and three children. A Milton, Mass., man was accused of killing his two sisters at a birthday party. A Santa Clara man was accused of killing his two children and three other relatives.

    An Orting, Wash., man was accused of killing his five children. A Chicago man was accused of killing his girlfriend’s sister, father, and grandfather, and an Alabama man was accused of killing his mother and grandparents. What’s going on?

    And there’s another indication that the high rates of suicide and violence are linked to prescription drugs—the high suicide rate in the military, where antidepressants are widely given.

    In just one month, July 2011, there were 32 suspected suicides, 21 among active duty troops and 10 among reservists. In one report, 36 percent of the troops who killed themselves had never even been deployed. That means that combat stress and post-traumatic stress disorder were not factors in the self-injurious behavior.

    You don’t have to be a cynic to ask if the reason so many troops are killing themselves is, at least partially, because they are taking drugs that make them kill themselves. Nor is it cynical to ask if some of the 20 million Americans in the general population who take such drugs could be behind the frequent mass shootings and family killings.

    Martha Rosenberg is a health reporter and author who lives in Chicago.



    http://www.politicalhotwire.com/gene...shootings.html


    Psychiatric drugs and violence - federal investigation long overdue « CCHR International

    Fact: At least fourteen recent school shootings were committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 109 wounded and 58 killed (in other school shootings, information about their drug use was never made public—neither confirming or refuting if they were under the influence of prescribed drugs.)
    Fact: Between 2004 and 2011, there have been over 11,000 reports to the U.S. FDA’s MedWatch system of psychiatric drug side effects related to violence. These include 300 cases of homicide, nearly 3,000 cases of mania and over 7,000 cases of aggression. Note: By the FDA’s own admission, only 1-10% of side effects are ever reported to the FDA, so the actual number of side effects occurring are most certainly higher. Citizens Commission on Human Rights, CCHR - Nonprofit Mental Health Watchdog




    Huntsville, Alabama – February 5, 2010: 15-year-old Hammad Memon shot and killed another Discover Middle School student Todd Brown. Memon had a history for being treated for ADHD and depression. He was taking the antidepressant Zoloft and “other drugs for the conditions.” He had been seeing a psychiatrist and psychologist.
    Kauhajoki, Finland – September 23, 2008: 22-year-old culinary student Matti Saari shot and killed 9 students and a teacher, and wounded another student, before killing himself. Saari was taking an SSRI and a benzodiazapine. He was also seeing a psychologist.
    Dekalb, Illinois – February 14, 2008: 27-year-old Steven Kazmierczak shot and killed five people and wounded 21 others before killing himself in a Northern Illinois University auditorium. According to his girlfriend, he had recently been taking Prozac, Xanax and Ambien. Toxicology results showed that he still had trace amount of Xanax in his system. He had been seeing a psychiatrist.
    Jokela, Finland – November 7, 2007: 18-year-old Finnish gunman Pekka-Eric Auvinen had been taking antidepressants before he killed eight people and wounded a dozen more at Jokela High School in southern Finland, then committed suicide.
    Cleveland, Ohio – October 10, 2007: 14-year-old Asa Coon stormed through his school with a gun in each hand, shooting and wounding four before taking his own life. Court records show Coon had been placed on the antidepressant Trazodone.
    Red Lake, Minnesota – March 2005: 16-year-old Jeff Weise, on Prozac, shot and killed his grandparents, then went to his school on the Red Lake Indian Reservation where he shot dead 7 students and a teacher, and wounded 7 before killing himself.
    Greenbush, New York – February 2004: 16-year-old Jon Romano strolled into his high school in east Greenbush and opened fire with a shotgun. Special education teacher Michael Bennett was hit in the leg. Romano had been taking “medication for depression”. He had previously seen a psychiatrist.
    Wahluke, Washington – April 10, 2001: Sixteen-year-old Cory Baadsgaard took a rifle to his high school and held 23 classmates and a teacher hostage. He had been taking the antidepressant Effexor.
    El Cajon, California – March 22, 2001: 18-year-old Jason Hoffman, on the antidepressants Celexa and Effexor, opened fire on his classmates, wounding three students and two teachers at Granite Hills High School. He had been seeing a psychiatrist before the shooting.
    Williamsport, Pennsylvania – March 7, 2001: 14-year-old Elizabeth Bush was taking the antidepressant Prozac when she shot at fellow students, wounding one.
    Conyers, Georgia – May 20, 1999: 15-year-old T.J. Solomon was being treated with the stimulant Ritalin when he opened fire on and wounded six of his classmates.
    Columbine, Colorado – April 20, 1999: 18-year-old Eric Harris and his accomplice, Dylan Klebold, killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 26 others before killing themselves. Harris was on the antidepressant Luvox. Klebold’s medical records remain sealed. Both shooters had been in anger-management classes and had undergone counseling. Harris had been seeing a psychiatrist before the shooting.
    Notus, Idaho – April 16, 1999: 15-year-old Shawn Cooper fired two shotgun rounds in his school, narrowly missing students. He was taking a prescribed SSRI antidepressant and Ritalin.
    Springfield, Oregon – May 21, 1998: 15-year-old Kip Kinkel murdered his parents and then proceeded to school where he opened fire on students in the cafeteria, killing two and wounding 25. Kinkel had been taking the antidepressant Prozac. Kinkel had been attending “anger control classes” and was under the care of a psychologist.


    For more information read Another School Shooting, Another Psychiatric Drug? Federal Investigation Long Overdue



    10 additional recent murders and murder-suicides, resulting in 47 dead and 21 wounded:

    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania – March 8, 2012: 30-year-old John Shick, former patient of University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) and former student at nearby Duquesne University, shot and killed one and injured six inside UPMC’s Western Psychiatrist Institute. Nine antidepressants were identified among the drugs police found in Shick’s apartment.
    Seal Beach, California – October 12, 2011: Scott DeKraai, a harbor tugboat worker, entered the hair salon where his ex-wife worked, killing her and seven others and injuring one. At DeKraai’s initial hearing, his attorney indicated to the judge that DeKraai was prescribed the antidepressant Trazodone and the “mood stabilizer” Topamax.
    Lakeland, Florida – May 3, 2009: Toxicology test results showed that 34-year-old Troy Bellar was on Tegretol, a drug prescribed for “bi-polar disorder,” when he shot and killed his wife and two of his three children in their home before killing himself.
    Granberry Crossing, Alabama – April 26, 2009: 53-year-old Fred B. Davis shot and killed a police officer and wounded a sheriff’s deputy who had responded to a call that Davis had threatened a neighbor with a gun. Prescription drug bottles found at the scene showed that Davis was prescribed the antipsychotic drug Geodon.
    Middletown, Maryland – April 17, 2009: Christopher Wood shot and killed his wife, three small children and himself inside their home. Toxicology test results verified that Wood had been taking the antidepressants Cymbalta and Paxil and the anti-anxiety drugs BuSpar and Xanax.
    Concord, California – January 11, 2009: Jason Montes, 33, shot and killed his wife and then himself at home. Montes had earlier begun taking the antidepressant Prozac for depression related to his impending divorce and a recent bankruptcy.
    Little Rock, Arkansas – August 14, 2008: Less than 48 hours after Timothy Johnson shot and killed Arkansas Democratic Party Chairman Bill Gwatney, the Little Rock Police declared they were investigating shooter’s use of the antidepressant Effexor, which was found in Johnson’s house. A Little Rock city police report later stated that Johnson “was on an anti-depressant and that the drug may have played a part in his ‘irrational and violent behavior.’”
    Omaha, Nebraska – December 5, 2007: 19-year-old Robert Hawkins killed eight people and wounded five before committing suicide in an Omaha mall. Autopsy results confirmed he was under the influence of the “anti-anxiety” drug Valium.
    North Meridian, Florida – July 8, 2003: Doug Williams killed five and wounded nine of his fellow Lockheed Martin employees before killing himself. Williams was reported as having been taking two antidepressants, Zoloft and Celexa, for depression after a failed marriage.
    Wakefield, Massachusetts – December 26, 2000: 42-year-old computer technician Michael McDermott had been taking three antidepressants when he hunted down employees in the accounting and human resources offices where he worked, killing seven.


    As far back as 1991, CCHR, along with numerous experts brought evidence before the US FDA that antidepressants were causing suicide and violence. The heavily Pharma-funded FDA panel ignored the evidence provided, and it would take 14 years, and a great deal of public pressure, for the FDA to finally issue it’s strongest warning, the black box, on antidepressants inducing suicidal ideation. 21 years later, the FDA has yet to issue a black box warning on antidepressants and other classes of psychiatric drugs documented by international regulatory agencies and studies to cause violence. This is not in the public’s interest, who deserve to be warned, it’s in Big Phama’s interest, upon whose funding the FDA heavily relies on.

  8. #668
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    I have not seen any evidence that the potential executive order has anything to do with confiscating privately owned firearms. In fact, such an action would be illegal. Executive orders cannot exceed Constitutional authority or stand in violation of legislation passed by Congress.
    An executive order than bans ownership of an item, makes that item illegal.

    A law abiding person who owns an illegal item will, in due course, turn it in to the proper authorities as the law would proscribe.

    With that said, there are currently a number of proposals about that include as part a direct confiscation of certain weapons and ammunition magazines. So it would depend on what the order contains.

    I stopped believing in a limit fo Executive Authority power when illegal immigration was de facto decriminalized, and was instead rewarded via order implementing much of the DREAM Act without Congressional approval.

    Unlike assassinating American citizens without due process


    In all likelihood, the order will be for stronger enforcement of already existing federal laws. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Quite right. We'll see.
    Last edited by Warfish; 01-10-2013 at 11:42 AM.

  9. #669
    P.S. With respect, can we please move the "Drugs" debate to it's own thread?

    It really is a completely different discussion.

  10. #670
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    An executive order than bans ownership of an item, makes that item illegal.

    From my understanding, this is incorrect. Legal status of any kind is determined through legislation. The executive branch cannot override the legislative branch unilaterally.

  11. #671
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,673
    Images
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    An executive order than bans ownership of an item, makes that item illegal.
    Incorrect. The president cannot make law by issuing an executive order.

    An executive order is basically a directive to executive branch agencies and officers, clarifying how to carry out enforcement of existing laws, or exercise the powers of the executive branch, according to the wishes of the president.

    Harry Truman tried to take control of the U.S. steel mills in 1952, by executive order. The Supreme Court slapped it down, specifically citing that it was an attempt to make law, which is not a power authorized to the executive branch by the constitution.

  12. #672
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    P.S. With respect, can we please move the "Drugs" debate to it's own thread?

    It really is a completely different discussion.
    I think it's done, his info won't convince me, and vice-versa (though I sincerely appreciate your taking the time to post it, Chief, I did read it, I just believe my 'experts' more than yours, as I'm sure you do as well), but you're right fish.

  13. #673
    Quote Originally Posted by isired View Post
    I think it's done, his info won't convince me, and vice-versa (though I sincerely appreciate your taking the time to post it, Chief, I did read it, I just believe my 'experts' more than yours, as I'm sure you do as well), but you're right fish.
    Aye it's a good topic, I hope I didn't sound dismissive, as that wasn't intended.

    Incorrect. The president cannot make law by issuing an executive order.
    Unless someone stops him, the Presidient can do whatever he wants via executive order.

    For example, recent Presidents have launched two major Wars and a number fo millitary strikes in a wide group of nations, almost all of it without a Declaration fo War, and in a number of cases, without congressional approval or oversight. He's also assassinated American citizens without so much as a trail in absentia.

    As a second example, the recent Presidential Order re: Illegal Immigration that de facto enacted the DREAM Act almost wholesale, and effectively de-criminalized being an illegal immigrant.

    The day I see our Congress rise up, as one, and tell a President "no, thats beyond your Constitutional Authority, persist and you will face impeachment" then I'll believe what you claim.

    Till then, the Presidient can do anything he wants via executive order IMO.

  14. #674
    Quote Originally Posted by isired View Post
    I think it's done, his info won't convince me, and vice-versa (though I sincerely appreciate your taking the time to post it, Chief, I did read it, I just believe my 'experts' more than yours, as I'm sure you do as well), but you're right fish.
    I always appreciate a good honest debate about the issues. Did you have some experts statistics to back up your position? I may have missed that post. I can't ever recall seeing a statistic that shows that more gun laws = less gun crimes. Regardless it is not often that anyone here convinces anyone of anything in direct debate. Posting here helps me clarify my positions and understand where the counterpoints are so that when these subjects come up in real life conversations I am more prepared to defend my positions. For that I thank anyone here that posts counter arguments.

  15. #675
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Till then, the Presidient can do anything he wants via executive order IMO.
    Do you really think that the President will issue an executive order to confiscate private firearms any time soon?

    I hear your concerns, and it's a big reason why any type of semi-auto gun ban should be avoided, but this is a little too tin foil hatish for me.

  16. #676
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,673
    Images
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Unless someone stops him, the Presidient can do whatever he wants via executive order.

    For example, recent Presidents have launched two major Wars and a number fo millitary strikes in a wide group of nations, almost all of it without a Declaration fo War, and in a number of cases, without congressional approval or oversight. He's also assassinated American citizens without so much as a trail in absentia.
    There are important differences between what you cite as examples and the executive order gun confiscation you imagine. In the cases of our recent foreign entanglements, there were congressional resolutions (with hefty winning margins) supporting the president's actions. As for "assassinating American citizens," not sure who you are referring to. If it's citizens caught as un-uniformed combatants bearing arms against the U.S. on foreign soil, it's an awfully fuzzy area. Regardless, in "small matters" (spying, dirty tricks, etc.), no administration completely heeds the Constitution. Its frequently trampled when it can be done out of sight of the mainstream.

    Issuing an order that directly challenges the 2nd Amendment for every U.S. citizen...not going to happen. It's political madness, and it would probably take less than a day for a federal hearing and an injunction against the order.

    As a second example, the recent Presidential Order re: Illegal Immigration that de facto enacted the DREAM Act almost wholesale, and effectively de-criminalized being an illegal immigrant.
    Admittedly, not much can be done if the executive branch decides not to enforce existing laws, but that isn't the same thing as making laws.

    The day I see our Congress rise up, as one, and tell a President "no, thats beyond your Constitutional Authority, persist and you will face impeachment" then I'll believe what you claim.

    Till then, the Presidient can do anything he wants via executive order IMO.
    Its the courts that would hold the executive branch accountable. The rest of your comment I regard as hyperbole.

  17. #677
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    Do you really think that the President will issue an executive order to confiscate private firearms any time soon?

    I hear your concerns, and it's a big reason why any type of semi-auto gun ban should be avoided, but this is a little too tin foil hatish for me.
    I think there is every possabillity that the Executive Branch will issue an Executive Order banning magazine with a capacity of 10 rounds or higher, yes.

    I think there is every possabillity that the Executive Branch will issue an Executive Order banning a selection of "assault weapons".

    And I think there is every possabillity that no one will do anything to stop such an Exeutive Order from taking effect.

    Will Jackbooted Thugs go door to door asking for you ammo clips or AR-15?

    No.

    But those items will have been made illegal to sell or posess just the same.

    All depends on if Congress does something, which it does not appear it will do, nor should it.

  18. #678
    Quote Originally Posted by rbstern View Post
    Admittedly, not much can be done if the executive branch decides not to enforce existing laws, but that isn't the same thing as making laws.
    because there is much of a meaningful difference between the Executive not enforcing duly passed laws, and executive ordering new laws that Congress won;t stop him from enforcing? The Courts can only come into play if a case comes before them, and then it'll take a decade for it to get anywhere that has power to truly close the case.

    By the way my friend, what exactly do you think most Federal Regulation is? The power of law without having ever been passed by Congress.

    Its the courts that would hold the executive branch accountable. The rest of your comment I regard as hyperbole.
    Regard it however you wish. We'll see how it plays out.

    I for one never thought I'd see a day where an Executive order would decriminalize illegal immigration, or where a President could get congress to pass a law that forces individuals to buy a private product against their will (Obamacare) or face fines and jailtime.

    There is alot of things I never thought I'd see that are daily occurences in politics today.

    So we'll see. I don't own a firearm, so it's not a personal issue for me.

  19. #679
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    I think there is every possabillity that the Executive Branch will issue an Executive Order banning magazine with a capacity of 10 rounds or higher, yes.

    I think there is every possabillity that the Executive Branch will issue an Executive Order banning a selection of "assault weapons".
    If you really believe this, then the question is how will the orders be executed and enforced?

    If there is no law on the books banning these items, then what will stop people from continuing to manufacture, buy, sell, possess, etc? Federal agents breaking down doors and physically stopping operations and performing confiscations?

    Again, the executive branch cannot make new law. Short of full fledged tyranny, there is no mechanism in place to support such a move.

  20. #680
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    If you really believe this, then the question is how will the orders be executed and enforced?
    Same way Federal Regulation is enforced, none of which is "Law", but carries the power of Law.

    Federal Law Enforcement and Federal Regulatory Officers.

    Again, the executive branch cannot make new law.
    So then we'll se NO Executive ORder whatsoever on Gun Control then.

    Great.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us