nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
I can only assume because these "rights"/cultural resentments are more important than dead Americans?
Are you referencing abortion?
I can only assume because these "rights"/cultural resentments are more important than dead Americans?
This Other Town
Nobody from “This Town” ever met the victims of Monday’s Navy yard shooting. That’s a shame.
By John Feehery|Posted Thursday, Sept. 19, 2013, at 11:14 AM
Mark Leibovich wrote This Town, a memorable book about official Washington, its fancy parties, its self-absorbed culture, the incestuous nature of lobbyists, journalists, pundits, strategists, party planners, and socialites.
But there’s a whole other town out there, right under the nose of This Town, and you could see the face of that town in the obituaries of those who died on Monday. Twelve people were gunned down at the Naval Yard, and I can pretty much guarantee that nobody from This Town had ever met them.
There are plenty of people in this other town in the Washington, D.C. metro area. Some serve at the Navy Yard, some at the Pentagon, some the Geospatial Agency, some at the Departments of Agriculture, Labor, Health and Human Services, and various other government agencies.
The people for this other town commute in from distant places like Woodbridge and Waldorf, Rockville, or PG County. They take the Metro, or the VRE or the MARC, or they catch the bus, or they slug their way in. By slug, I mean they basically hitchhike (in an organized fashion, of course), by jumping in other people’s cars at specific points on the highway, which allows the drivers to drive on the HOV lanes. It’s an ingenious system, mostly done organically.
That’s what folks do in this other town to get into work.
These folks work in the Federal government because it is good steady work and the benefits are pretty good, and they like what they do. Some are stirred by patriotism to serve their country in the military, while others like working in fields like health policy or with agriculture programs.
Folks in this other town don’t get to decide whether the government shuts down or not, although if they are deemed nonessential personnel, they don’t work on those days that the government does shut down. Many of these people in this other town got hit hard with the sequester. Some had to take unpaid days off because they were furloughed, all because the Congress decided that cutting discretionary spending was far easier than cutting entitlement spending. Because so many of these folks in this other town live in the suburbs, and because many of the housing prices in those suburbs crashed so substantially, it would be pretty fair to say that they have a better understanding of what the rest of America has been going through than the denizens of This Town.
The 12 who died in Monday’s attack pretty much typified this other town. They ranged in ages from 46 to 73. They mostly liked what they did for a living. Only one lived in the District of Columbia. Most had pretty long commutes into work that morning. They were a racially diverse group and they did all kinds of different things to help make the Navy run. Some were contractors, others were civilian employees, some were still in the Navy.
One of the victims had served as president of the local Rotary Club. Another coached the local girls Jaycees softball team. One was an immigrant from India who had lived the American dream.
Some had already been marked by tragedy. One victim had a son who had been shot dead in the back years earlier. Another’s house had burned down and had to start from scratch.
None of them really thought that when they woke up that fateful Monday morning that it would be their last. They worked for the Navy, but they weren’t on the front lines of whatever war we might be fighting at the moment.
Official Washington, the folks from This Town, have already moved on to the next thing. To them, like the various other needless and senseless violent gun attacks that have befallen the country, this is just another example of how tragedy hits folks outside the bubble. To the folks in This Town, this might have happened almost anywhere else in America, but it happened surreally in their back yard, to people they didn’t really know, but had probably run across in their daily travels.
The folks in this other town, as exemplified by those who died on Monday, are not so different than people in the rest of the country. They live for their families and they are doing the best that they can to make it through every day. Some people like to rail against Washington and Washington bureaucrats, but those folks who live in this other town aren’t getting rich at the expense of the taxpayers. They are trying to do their jobs the best they can, and they provide an essential role in the running of our federal government.
Navy yard shootings: Federal employees and contractors were the victims. - Slate Magazine
Are you referencing abortion?
Well there's empty rhetoric on both sides. It's too bad no one listens to those of us in the middle, it's only the extremes that get heard. The amount of guns is a symptom not the problem. It's the gun culture. There are sectors of this society that have an almost unhealthy obsession with guns. They're toys, bumper stickers, fashion accessories in music videos, and celebrated in these circles. You have folks that are calling for more guns, championing teachers with guns, championing college campuses with guns without championing the background checks or training. And I'm not talking about training, "here's how to hold your gun", but real training about how to react in a public mass shooting. But no we can't have that, so now we get drunken college frat boys with guns and school full of accessible guns. Yay! So we just keep pumping more guns into the country, well guess what it just makes it that much easier... soon you won't even need a blackmarket.And we still fail to address the real problem.
When you consider how many millions of guns exist in the US, and the relatively minute number that are used in crimes, to blame the gun is empty rhetoric. Otherwise, we would see mass shoot-outs all over the country every day.
I think the issue is much more nuanced than that. Many of the mass shootings have occurred from mentally unstable, school age kids, or the disgruntle. These aren't usually the kind of folks that have ties to the blackmarket. Many of those instances where you hear someone say, "he just snapped" were not planned out weeks in advanced. The ease of access allowed these folks to react in the moment to their emotions or lack of clarity.If you removed 90% of the guns in the US, you would not see a 90% drop in gun crime. The individuals who want to commit a crime using a gun will find a gun.
that was amazing. right out of the playbook. thank you.
Well there's empty rhetoric on both sides. It's too bad no one listens to those of us in the middle, it's only the extremes that get heard. The amount of guns is a symptom not the problem. It's the gun culture. There are sectors of this society that have an almost unhealthy obsession with guns. They're toys, bumper stickers, fashion accessories in music videos, and celebrated in these circles. You have folks that are calling for more guns, championing teachers with guns, championing college campuses with guns without championing the background checks or training. And I'm not talking about training, "here's how to hold your gun", but real training about how to react in a public mass shooting. But no we can't have that, so now we get drunken college frat boys with guns and school full of accessible guns. Yay! So we just keep pumping more guns into the country, well guess what it just makes it that much easier... soon you won't even need a blackmarket.
I think the issue is much more nuanced than that. Many of the mass shootings have occurred from mentally unstable, school age kids, or the disgruntle. These aren't usually the kind of folks that have ties to the blackmarket. Many of those instances where you hear someone say, "he just snapped" were not planned out weeks in advanced. The ease of access allowed these folks to react in the moment to their emotions or lack of clarity.
Well there's empty rhetoric on both sides. It's too bad no one listens to those of us in the middle, it's only the extremes that get heard. The amount of guns is a symptom not the problem. It's the gun culture. There are sectors of this society that have an almost unhealthy obsession with guns. They're toys, bumper stickers, fashion accessories in music videos, and celebrated in these circles. You have folks that are calling for more guns, championing teachers with guns, championing college campuses with guns without championing the background checks or training. And I'm not talking about training, "here's how to hold your gun", but real training about how to react in a public mass shooting. But no we can't have that, so now we get drunken college frat boys with guns and school full of accessible guns. Yay! So we just keep pumping more guns into the country, well guess what it just makes it that much easier... soon you won't even need a blackmarket.
What drives the individual to utilize a gun in a criminal fashion (the one in X million) and how to prevent/stop/discourage that person will lead to a better solution.
You blame guns.
You acknowledge that nearly all gun owners are law abiding citizens (who don’t buy guns to commit crimes).
You don’t understand gun culture, so rather than focus on the criminal, gun owners’ rights are not valid/worth protecting.
Here is an editorial or list of children’s names (will their pictures be next?)
Will there be any effort to go beyond the forgoing?
I am having a difficult time understanding your position, so I'd like to clarify rather than misunderstand.
Are you in favour of NO restrictions on guns as things are now and only in favour of "preventing/stopping/discouraging" people from using them? I'm not sure what that even amounts to, it's such squishy language. Cognitive/behavioural therapy?
Surely there are reasonably restrictions that can be placed on gun ownership, but if even that is a point that you are not willing to concede on, then I'm not sure what else is left.
Like I said, I don't want to misstate what you've said.
I think considering limiting/banning guns available to the mentally ill falls well short of where we need to be. Lots of reasons, but some being:
1. Does that apply to those who are diagnosed with a mental illness? What about those who haven't sought help or aren't in the system? What's the definition of mental illness that we'll apply to the gun scenario?
2. What about people who don't have a history of mental illness but "snap" in the heat of the moment or are clinically depressed but situationally so, etc?
3. What about those who have no documented history of mental illness but do have a long, documented history of aggression or unstable behaviour?
And even if you take the position that ALL the people who commit mass shootings are mentally ill, those deaths only comprise a small number of the total gun-related fatalities in the USA. The vast majority are committed by criminals, mentally healthy people with no records, domestic abusers, dumb teenagers, etc. and not by a paranoid schizophrenic who finally loses it.
TBH, I don't think you have any hope of any sort of reform. Whoever said that this is just how things are in the US is probably right. Sad, but true.
There are too many guns, too many special interest groups, too many people repeating the "2nd amendment is clear" like lemmings, too many people who seem to be professional contrarians and so on.
If you removed 90% of the guns in the US, you would not see a 90% drop in gun crime. The individuals who want to commit a crime using a gun will find a gun.
There was, I think two(?) MP's that were armed at the scene, one of which he immediately killed and took his weapon. That's not "many." It's actually "next to none."
Yet, areas outside of Chicago and DC are not plagued with shootings.
Here is an editorial or list of children’s names (will their pictures be next?)
Why is it even an argument that because not EVERY gun can be confiscated, it shouldn't even be tried to get stricter gun laws?
When a kid can easily get a gun, something's WRONG with your country. If you make it harder for people to get a gun, less gun related crimes will occur. Simple as that. Sure, the big bad guys will still be able to get a gun, but they already can do that now? So if you can prevent a lot of gun related crimes, murders and mass shootings by starting to regulate guns, why the fuck wouldn't you want it?
It's like saying in sports, "oh we can't possibly beat all our opponnents, maybe we should just drop out of the competition"...
I'm not saying that either of you are, in general, passive towards gun reform (I haven't observed that in this thread), merely that these individual posts have an either/or mentality when I personally believe taking several angles at this problem is more likely to increase safety than settling on one.
I have no idea how you got that from my post. I didn't make any proposal or suggestion, I just pointed out that mental illness is complicated, as is the diagnosis, so the idea that we can use it as a parameter in gun control is something that has to be thought through very thoroughly.
If we regulated cars like we do guns Adam Lanza would have driven a tank through that elementary school.
The only thing that stops a bad man with a tank is a good man with a tank.
It makes me sick to my stomach, really, that you would even be so passe at the posting of their names as though it was just a bit of fluff journalism. It's reality. Those are dead children. Kids who had Christmas presents waiting for them at home. It's never going to go away, it's never going to be ok for those parents and family and friends. It just absolutely kills me that people can look at that list of names and basically say, "So?"
As for my prior comment, posting the names of children becomes the emotional putty to fill in the logical gaps in one’s argument.
If you get ill so easily, perhaps you shouldn’t read this discussion. As a parent, and close friend of those who’ve lost their children, I fully understand the tragedy and how it affects the parents and community. And I shouldn’t have to explain that to you to participate in a rational debate on gun control.
As for my prior comment, posting the names of children becomes the emotional putty to fill in the logical gaps in one’s argument. Passing laws that wouldn’t prevent a tragedy and won’t prevent one in the future just to feel better or make a symbolic statement is bad policy. Propose a law that will have clear, direct results and we can have a discussion.
Sang Ho Kim, 64 years old, allegedly walked into Sav Energy at 645 South St., around 10:11 am and shot two employees, police said. The company is located in a single-story commercial building in East Garden City, a half-mile from the mall.
At a news conference, police said they believe Mr. Kim has been working as a vendor to the company, and alleged that he specifically targeted it.
Mr. Kim is from Queens and allegedly has a history with police, a law-enforcement official said.