0

Right.
But what will the government do? They need to do something soon.

Truthfully? Probably nothing.. Unless many people start a petition or start lobbying for a change in gun control policy.

0

Truthfully? Probably nothing.. Unless many people start a petition or start lobbying for a change in gun control policy.

Yeah, and even then, they probably won't do anything.

0

Oh and if anyone wants to participate:

Tomorrow, April 20, 2007, is being declared as Hokie Hope Day in honor of the victims of the Virginia Tech shootings. Everyone is invited to show their support for the Virginia Tech family by wearing the VT clothing or school colors of orange and maroon.

Additionally, Governor Bill Ritter is encouraging places of worship and other facilities across the state to join in a nationwide bell-ringing and moment of silence. That'll take place at 10 a.m. on Friday. Governor Ritter has also ordered the Colorado flag to fly at half-staff at state facilities until Sunday. President Bush had previously ordered U.S. flags fly at half-staff through Sunday.

Friday also marks the eighth anniversary of the attacks at Columbine High School in Littleton.

So, if you'd like to participate and show support, that would be great. My entire high school is also encouraged to do this tomorrow.
Thanks.

0

Oh and if anyone wants to participate:

Tomorrow, April 20, 2007, is being declared as Hokie Hope Day in honor of the victims of the Virginia Tech shootings. Everyone is invited to show their support for the Virginia Tech family by wearing the VT clothing or school colors of orange and maroon.

Additionally, Governor Bill Ritter is encouraging places of worship and other facilities across the state to join in a nationwide bell-ringing and moment of silence. That'll take place at 10 a.m. on Friday. Governor Ritter has also ordered the Colorado flag to fly at half-staff at state facilities until Sunday. President Bush had previously ordered U.S. flags fly at half-staff through Sunday.

Friday also marks the eighth anniversary of the attacks at Columbine High School in Littleton.

So, if you'd like to participate and show support, that would be great. My entire high school is also encouraged to do this tomorrow.
Thanks.

I just got a letter like that and invitation to join a VT remembrance group on facebook

0

Yeah, it would just be nice if people participated tomorrow.

You have facebook? (totally off topic, I know lol).

hah.. 'course I have a facebook, who doesn't? You don't have to do so much work like on myspace..

[edit] I really don't have anything orange and maroon lol.. But I'll wear some TECH clothes (Texas Tech)

0

Lol... I don't have facebook... I'm an addictive member of myspace as of now.

Yeah... I don't think it really matters, as long as you're doing it in the remembrance of them. That's really all that tomorrow is. Remembering and honoring the people who died.

0

Lol... I don't have facebook... I'm an addictive member of myspace as of now.

Yeah... I don't think it really matters, as long as you're doing it in the remembrance of them. That's really all that tomorrow is. Remembering and honoring the people who died.

tuh, myspace.. Some girls at my school were actually stalked and abducted by some dude on myspace.. So they blocked myspace with websense.. but we all just use a proxy to get around it.

0

tuh, myspace.. Some girls at my school were actually stalked and abducted by some dude on myspace.. So they blocked myspace with websense.. but we all just use a proxy to get around it.

Omgosh that's ridiculous. (about the abduction)
Yeah, that hasn't happened here but my school is basically like a prison so they also blocked myspace. The weird thing is they blocked all the proxy websites too... so I don't really know how to get around that.

0

haha.. I'm actually trying to install Circumventor proxy server on my computer so I will always be able to bypass websense.. But It isn't working, and no one on daniweb appears interested in helping me lol..

Try using this: https://www.kproxy.com
We found that our school doesn't block it b/c it's secure http (https).. same with gmail, if you use https://www.gmail.com, then you can access it.

0

Mattethington wrote...
"And let's look at DCC's interpretation of the second amendment, which he claims is bolstered by court hearings."

My interpretation? That was a quote from a prominent spokesperson! And specifically what was being referred to was the Dick Act of 1903.

http://academic.udayton.edu/health/syllabi/bioterrorism/8Military/milita01.htm

In 1903, Congress attempted to restore the usefulness of the state militias with the Dick Act. This act marked the beginning of the federalization of the militia. The Dick Act also split the militia into two branches: the organized militia, which became known as the National Guard, and the unorganized militia. The act provided federal funds for equipment and training, required drill a specified number of days each year, and gave federal inspectors the right to review state militia practices. Congress continued the federalization of the National Guard through numerous subsequent acts. The result today is that the National Guard is a reserve force of the United States Army under significant federal control.

The NRA went on a campaign a while back to imprint the phrase "the right to bare arms" in the public's mind which has had its desired effects, most of our youths today aren't aware that this is only an excerpt of the entire quotation.

The following two quotes are excerpts from this article.

"Former Chief Justice Warren Burger, appearing on the MacNeil-Lehrer News Hour, December 16, 1991 stated "The Second Amendment has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of frauds, and I repeat the word "fraud" on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime."

"In the contentious debate over gun control, opponents of reasonable gun laws regularly argue that even the smallest form of regulation infringes upon Americans' "Second Amendment right" to own guns. This argument is without legal or historical support. In fact, the Second Amendment does not provide an individual with the right to bear arms. As the Supreme Court stated in United States v. Miller, more than 60 years ago, the Second Amendment was designed to "to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness" of the state militia and the Amendment "must be interpreted and applied with that end in view." 307 U.S. 174, 178 (1939). The federal courts have consistently echoed the view that the Second Amendment guarantees a right to be armed only to persons using the arms in service to an organized state militia. President Nixon's Solicitor General and former dean of Harvard Law School, Erwin Griswold declared, "that the Second Amendment poses no barrier to strong gun laws is perhaps the most well-settled proposition in American Constitutional Law."

The second amendment is one of those issues that has been so heatedly debated that there is enough information to support either side of the argument that it was intended to mean the right for us to bear arms that anyone can goolge the topic and take their pick of sources to support their argument. But the court do still contend that it does not interpret it to mean the right for individual to bear arms.

Just to make my feelings clear here, I own firearms and support the right for others to own firearms. I don't support organizations that will distort truths to shore up their shaky platform.


Mattethington...you wouldn't be a member of the NRA by any chance?

0

You guys are getting a little of the topic here, perhaps you should start your own thread to discuss your particulars?

0

You guys are getting a little of the topic here, perhaps you should start your own thread to discuss your particulars?

You're the one who brought up the NRA.

0

The person who first inserted her politicking about guns on this thread was jbennet, on the first page. The first person to mention the NRA was joshSHC, on page 9. The first person to lose control of her mind upon seeing the letters "NRA" was christina>you, on page 13. I don't see how dcc could be blamed for any of this.

0

You're the one who brought up the NRA.

Actually the NRA is germane to the topic, I was referring to the tech help you were seeking regarding blocked proxy websites.

0

The person who first inserted her politicking about guns on this thread was jbennet, on the first page. The first person to mention the NRA was joshSHC, on page 9. The first person to lose control of her mind upon seeing the letters "NRA" was christina>you, on page 13. I don't see how dcc could be blamed for any of this.

Unless I missed something here, which is very possible as I'm not keeping track, I believe what Christina was referring to was my admonishment about hijacking this thread for technical support. Unfortunately my post was out of order which made it possible for her to (god only knows why) to assume that I was referring to her vote for the NRA rather than her conversation with Josh. Go Figure.

0

Unless I missed something here, which is very possible as I'm not keeping track, I believe what Christina was referring to was my admonishment about hijacking this thread for technical support. Unfortunately my post was out of order which made it possible for her to (god only knows why) to assume that I was referring to her vote for the NRA rather than her conversation with Josh. Go Figure.

Hey, there weren't many people debating this issue, and we suddenly became very bored! We only talked about proxies for a brief period of time. If this is the first time that anyone has ever gone off topic in a thread then please shoot us both..

As for the 2nd amendment.. I have never in my life heard of it interpreted that way dcc.. Even in the college level Government class I took, the professor never mentioned your interpretation.. I know that it does not say specifically in the constitution that all American citizens have the right to bear arms.. It was implied, and most people accept it that way.. It's just the strict-constitutionalists that are always trying to bring up insignificant points about the constitution...

0

Okay, then you should know how I feel.

I can understand how you might feel. I can't understand your reaction to it.

Well, my point was just the fact that I hate the gun control in this country. And it's hurting innocent people.

It's people that hurt people. Period. Even if we had stricter gun regulation, angry people can still get guns and do this. It's possible to get guns into places that have outlawed them. The problem we have is that a very few people have severe psychological issues, and they're the ones that cause these tragedies. Unfortunately, we have about as good of a chance of eliminating gun crime as we do of preventing these people from commiting heinous crimes (gun based or otherwise). For those of us who are otherwise powerless (and innocent), we need ways to protect ourselves.

0

Hey, there weren't many people on here discussing anything, and we just started talking about proxies very briefly. If this is the first time that anyone has ever gone off topic in a thread then shoot us both..

Ouch. Bad phrasing. :P

And yeah, the off-topic was a little much. Maybe swap MSN and you can chat or something? It's not the first time stuff has gone off topic, but the off topic trend runs pretty rampant around here...

0

Ouch. Bad phrasing. :P

And yeah, the off-topic was a little much. Maybe swap MSN and you can chat or something? It's not the first time stuff has gone off topic, but the off topic trend runs pretty rampant around here...

lol.. yea that does sound bad.. I'll have to go change that. MSN? I hate msn.. aol is much better.. oh damn, there I go off topic again..:-/

0

lol.. yea that does sound bad.. I'll have to go change that. MSN? I hate msn.. aol is much better.. oh damn, there I go off topic again..:-/

Actually, I find MSN to be more featureful, and no one outside of the US uses AIM. ICQ is just... dead...

0

Actually, I find MSN to be more featureful, and no one outside of the US uses AIM. ICQ is just... dead...

AIM completely murders msn! It has much better features.. Why the hell would you want talk w/ some1 outside the U.S? Everything outside the U.S. blows..:D hah, icq is almost completely dead

[edit] Dude, I have 666 posts! Ok, I'm not posting again..

0

Hey, there weren't many people debating this issue, and we suddenly became very bored! We only talked about proxies for a brief period of time. If this is the first time that anyone has ever gone off topic in a thread then please shoot us both..

As for the 2nd amendment.. I have never in my life heard of it interpreted that way dcc.. Even in the college level Government class I took, the professor never mentioned your interpretation.. I know that it does not say specifically in the constitution that all American citizens have the right to bear arms.. It was implied, and most people accept it that way.. It's just the strict-constitutionalists that are always trying to bring up insignificant points about the constitution...

Actually the courts have been interpreting it this way for a very long time. I wish I had bookmarked something I was reading yesterday regarding a man that was arrested for transporting firearms over the state line. The man tried to defend this by invoking the second amendment, the court eventually determined that the second amendment does not guarantee a person the right to bear arms.

As I wrote in my last long winded post, there is a tremendous amount of information out there regarding the second amendment. I suspect that your instructor may have been walking the straight and narrow lest they open up a can of worms that would last all semester.

0

Actually the courts have been interpreting it this way for a very long time. I wish I had bookmarked something I was reading yesterday regarding a man that was arrested for transporting firearms over the state line. The man tried to defend this by invoking the second amendment, the court eventually determined that the second amendment does not guarantee a person the right to bear arms.

As I wrote in my last long winded post, there is a tremendous amount of information out there regarding the second amendment. I suspect that your instructor may have been walking the straight and narrow lest they open up a can of worms that would last all semester.

hmm, yea I've been researching it online and it doesn't seem that the supreme court has ever really decided for sure the meaning of the 2nd amendment.. hell, I think we need to get this fixed.. perhaps propose an amendment that does specifically give ALL Americans that right to bear arms..

0

Josh, if it ain't broke don't try to fix it. We do have the right to purchase, own, and use firearms and that's not going to change in our lifetime.

One thing that we could do would be to add another restriction to the eligibility for the purchase of firearms. Psychologist and Psychiatrist are required to report certain types of patient information to law enforcement, I would like to see them required to report patients who demonstrate the potential of violent acts. This information should be used to make these patients ineligible for the purchase of firearms and ammunition.

Unfortunately this will never happen because these doctors will never be able to say positively that these people are going to become violent.

Oh well, it's three in the morning and I'm just thinking out loud.

0

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/drving.htm
And in other news, 46 people died because some other idiot "OD on alcohol" (a nice "taxed" drug) decided to get behind the wheel of a missile and drive it round until it crashed into something nice and soft. And that happens EVERY day, not once every x years.

I doubt very much if any of those 46 people get a mention in even the local newspaper, never mind the wall-to-wall coverage around the planet around the clock. Even now, it's all about the guy who pulled the trigger, not those who just got in the way.

The only remarkable thing about this is the number involved, nothing more. You can kill as many people as you like, so long as you do it in a socially "conditioned" way of only one or two at a time, but bump up the numbers (say an aircraft or train crash), and then everyone knows about it, and all the kooks with an axe to grind get another 15 minutes on the TV.
What's the daily total for gun murders "one at a time"?

Maybe you should ban say cars, or maybe alcohol.
Oh wait, you tried that already - it didn't work then and it won't work now.

0

Josh, if it ain't broke don't try to fix it. We do have the right to purchase, own, and use firearms and that's not going to change in our lifetime.

One thing that we could do would be to add another restriction to the eligibility for the purchase of firearms. Psychologist and Psychiatrist are required to report certain types of patient information to law enforcement, I would like to see them required to report patients who demonstrate the potential of violent acts. This information should be used to make these patients ineligible for the purchase of firearms and ammunition.

Unfortunately this will never happen because these doctors will never be able to say positively that these people are going to become violent.

It may not be a problem now, but I can definitely see some difficulties in the future.. The ambiguous amendment needs to be clarified..
As for your idea about reporting potentially violent patients to the law enforcement, you're right.. It would be almost impossible for doctors to know for sure. However, I say we deny ALL mental patients the privilege of owning a gun. If someone is diagnosed with any kind of psychological illness, then they should not be able to posses any firearms..

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/drving.htm
And in other news, 46 people died because some other idiot "OD on alcohol" (a nice "taxed" drug) decided to get behind the wheel of a missile and drive it round until it crashed into something nice and soft. And that happens EVERY day, not once every x years.

I doubt very much if any of those 46 people get a mention in even the local newspaper, never mind the wall-to-wall coverage around the planet around the clock. Even now, it's all about the guy who pulled the trigger, not those who just got in the way.

The only remarkable thing about this is the number involved, nothing more. You can kill as many people as you like, so long as you do it in a socially "conditioned" way of only one or two at a time, but bump up the numbers (say an aircraft or train crash), and then everyone knows about it, and all the kooks with an axe to grind get another 15 minutes on the TV.
What's the daily total for gun murders "one at a time"?

The shooter accomplished exactly what he wanted.. He wanted media attention and fame.. And he has succeeded (although I'd refer to him as notorious rather than famous). He was just some crazy psychopath whom not many knew. However, he is now in the media spotlight.. I think we need to stop obsessing over this.. We need to just leave the victim's families alone, and stop trying to make this into such a huge ordeal b/c that is exactly what the shooter would have wanted.

0

The person who first inserted her politicking about guns on this thread was jbennet, on the first page. The first person to mention the NRA was joshSHC, on page 9. The first person to lose control of her mind upon seeing the letters "NRA" was christina>you, on page 13. I don't see how dcc could be blamed for any of this.

You like to instigate problems don't you? "The first person to lose control of her mind upon seeing the letters 'NRA' was christina>you." Lose control of my mind? That doesn't even make sense. My exact words were. 'The NRA is stupid.' How is that losing control? You are crazy.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.