TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/08/07/ohio.shooting/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Seven people, including an 11-year-old child, were shot and killed in a small town in northeastern Ohio on Sunday in a rampage that ended when police killed the suspected gunman, authorities said.......

Sad business...not quite sure what in blazes is wrong with folks like that. Lots of folks I don't like in this world, but I do my best to not go around them. The vast majority of the members of this forum obtained CHLs so that we may LEGALLY CARRY our handguns for the protection of ourselves, our family/friends, and possibly our property. The vast majority of folks who decide to commit these sorts of heinous crimes don't bother with CHLs. It is two different mindsets. WE of this forum don't want to HAVE to use our firearms in anger, but its good to have tools to assist in our safety...those other types, well, that's another story, isn't it? A story with a very bad ending, like this one in Ohio...the worst part is the media, ghouls that they can be...they ONLY run the worst stories involving firearms. If it wasn't for firearms magazines or forums like this one, you'd never hear about defensive uses of firearms.

I am at a loss. I feel so terrible for surviving family members. At the same time, I am angry because I know some dip is going to use this instance as "one more example" for why we need stricter gun laws. You know the Brady Center is going to be all over this. By the way, if you ever want to feel completely aggravated, go visit their site. You really do need to know what the enemy is up to. The way they can twist events to fit their agenda usually leaves me with my mouth open. I made a plea, last night, for people to join the NRA, and to support the NRA-ILA. This is one of our best ramparts against the flood of stupidity and ignorance

Here is a good example of why they are important. I just watched a clip of the Executive VP and CEO of the NRA, Wayne LaPierre, off of YouTube. It was an appearance he just put in on FoxNews, a conservative network. The anti-gun nuts are so effective that even the interviewer was swallowing the Kool-Aid. He was there to talk about the new BATFE requirement (and the attempt to deflect attention away from the Fast and Furious debacle) that dealers must report anyone who buys more than one long gun in a week. The gal interviewing him was honestly baffled as to why he would oppose such regulations if it might keep guns out of the hands of the criminal cartels. Wayne was very gracious and did not make her feel like a moron, and he could have! I am not sure she ever really understood what he was trying to say. Piece by piece, people, piece by piece. The right-wing, and the Obama administration are smart enough to know they can not get away with a full-scale assault on our second ammendment rights...they know they have to piecemeal it out. A little seemingly insignificant thing here, one there. The framers of our constitution knew the danger of a government that did not want its citizens armed. A government that does not want its people armed, does not have citizens, it has subjects.

RJ

johnson0317 wrote:I am at a loss. I feel so terrible for surviving family members. At the same time, I am angry because I know some dip is going to use this instance as "one more example" for why we need stricter gun laws. You know the Brady Center is going to be all over this. By the way, if you ever want to feel completely aggravated, go visit their site. You really do need to know what the enemy is up to. The way they can twist events to fit their agenda usually leaves me with my mouth open. I made a plea, last night, for people to join the NRA, and to support the NRA-ILA. This is one of our best ramparts against the flood of stupidity and ignorance

Here is a good example of why they are important. I just watched a clip of the Executive VP and CEO of the NRA, Wayne LaPierre, off of YouTube. It was an appearance he just put in on FoxNews, a conservative network. The anti-gun nuts are so effective that even the interviewer was swallowing the Kool-Aid. He was there to talk about the new BATFE requirement (and the attempt to deflect attention away from the Fast and Furious debacle) that dealers must report anyone who buys more than one long gun in a week. The gal interviewing him was honestly baffled as to why he would oppose such regulations if it might keep guns out of the hands of the criminal cartels. Wayne was very gracious and did not make her feel like a moron, and he could have! I am not sure she ever really understood what he was trying to say. Piece by piece, people, piece by piece. The right-wing, and the Obama administration are smart enough to know they can not get away with a full-scale assault on our second ammendment rights...they know they have to piecemeal it out. A little seemingly insignificant thing here, one there. The framers of our constitution knew the danger of a government that did not want its citizens armed. A government that does not want its people armed, does not have citizens, it has subjects.

RJ

Two things: First, Fox News is NOT a conservative network. Its simply that the others are so leftist that Fox looks conservative in contrast AND they allow PUNDITS who are conservative to voice their opinions, also at odds with the other news sources. Just trying to add some clarity on that one. Second, you are correct about incrementalism. That is exactly how the anti-firearm, anti-self-defense crowd did it in the UK, Australia, and Canada. A little at a time. Quite impossible, indeed, for them to go "door-to-door"...but if they can ever get Americans to buy off on doing it "for safety", then they take one step closer to their eventual goal of disarming the populace. They only care about "the masses" and not one whit about any individual who may suffer because they didn't have the means to defend themselves. It is a herd mentality that leftists have and it is also about control...control of you and me.

...that's why those of us who understand what you just said will fight hard at every step...every bit of ground we give up will cost us another bit...till they own the whole country...

Sad.

I hate to say this, but this is why I keep loaded magazines for my firearms. We have a neighbor who, unfortunately, had one of their kids walk down the bad path of life. Stealing from them, others, drugs, time in jail, etc. The kid is out, and comes visit because every now and then wants to visit her kids that the mom and dad are raising for her. All that said, on her visitations, it's not uncommon for her to fight with her parents, to the point of pushing them on the ground and having the cops called on her. It's also not uncommon for her to bring some of her "friends" to the house.

I've told my wife about the "worse case scenario" and its sad to see it actually happen somewhere else.

GhostTX wrote:The kid is out, and comes visit because every now and then wants to visit her kids that the mom and dad are raising for her. All that said, on her visitations, it's not uncommon for her to fight with her parents, to the point of pushing them on the ground and having the cops called on her. It's also not uncommon for her to bring some of her "friends" to the house.

And yet the parents let her come back. Sorry, but the problem is more with the parents than the daughter. They took their grandkid in, and should have had a restraining order issued against the daughter -- to protect the child, if not themselves. The daughter is what she is. The parents failed in their duties to protect themselves and the grandchild.

Sad situation? Yes, but it's a dysfunctional family, not just the daughter.

Heartland Patriot wrote: Two things: First, Fox News is NOT a conservative network. Its simply that the others are so leftist that Fox looks conservative in contrast AND they allow PUNDITS who are conservative to voice their opinions, also at odds with the other news sources.

umm, I respectfully beg to differ...and FoxNews is on at my house most of the time. Their Internet newspage is my home page. The programs that make up the majority of their viewing audience are indeed conservative, but they do allow non-conservative points of view. If they were not conservative, do you think the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" would have been pushed the way it was? You is what you is, or you is not. If they are not conservative, then they are liberal. There is no "fair and balanced" in the media, although they do attempt to give both sides a chance, sort of. You ever hear Bill, or Hannity continually shut down a dissenting voice mid-sentence? You ever see them not do so?

Sorry, just not sure how you came to the conclusion that you did.

RJ

This is VERY close to my hometown and where many of my friends and family still live. It is a suburban neighborhood and the idea that this happened there is horrifying. I am glad the police were able to end it. It certainly isn't Texas where you expect the guy across the street to pull out his deer rifle and put lead on target.

Pray for all involved.

sjfcontrol wrote:

GhostTX wrote:The kid is out, and comes visit because every now and then wants to visit her kids that the mom and dad are raising for her. All that said, on her visitations, it's not uncommon for her to fight with her parents, to the point of pushing them on the ground and having the cops called on her. It's also not uncommon for her to bring some of her "friends" to the house.

And yet the parents let her come back. Sorry, but the problem is more with the parents than the daughter. They took their grandkid in, and should have had a restraining order issued against the daughter -- to protect the child, if not themselves. The daughter is what she is. The parents failed in their duties to protect themselves and the grandchild.

Sad situation? Yes, but it's a dysfunctional family, not just the daughter.

I'm not trying to point out fault. I'm just saying I have a situation that could easily escalate to what just happened per the OP. Be prepared, that's all.

Boy, a domestic violence case is one of the worst case scenarios for a police response. They can be taking down the offender and find themselves being violently attacked by the previously victimized spouse. If it happened next door to me, I'd be very leery of getting involved in stopping that, but sometimes circumstances force the decision. The gunmen was running down the street and chasing people into other residences.

Latest news story, however, is the offender was shot by a police officer and a private citizen.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati ... 7369.story" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

johnson0317 wrote:

Heartland Patriot wrote: Two things: First, Fox News is NOT a conservative network. Its simply that the others are so leftist that Fox looks conservative in contrast AND they allow PUNDITS who are conservative to voice their opinions, also at odds with the other news sources.

umm, I respectfully beg to differ...and FoxNews is on at my house most of the time. Their Internet newspage is my home page. The programs that make up the majority of their viewing audience are indeed conservative, but they do allow non-conservative points of view. If they were not conservative, do you think the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" would have been pushed the way it was? You is what you is, or you is not. If they are not conservative, then they are liberal. There is no "fair and balanced" in the media, although they do attempt to give both sides a chance, sort of. You ever hear Bill, or Hannity continually shut down a dissenting voice mid-sentence? You ever see them not do so?

Sorry, just not sure how you came to the conclusion that you did.

RJ

Like I said, their PUNDITS (Commentators, ect. whatever you want to call folks like Hannity and O'Reilly), are conservative. And it is excellent that Fox News has them on...but they also have people like that Shep guy working there...and if you have listened to him, he is NOT conservative. I read a LOT of conservative websites, and use those as my benchmark...and by that token, Fox News is certainly nowhere near liberal, but I'd actually call them moderate. If you would like, I can PM you some of the conservative websites I visit on a regular basis and you will see what I mean. Do not get me wrong, I look at Fox News online a LOT...

johnson0317 wrote:

Heartland Patriot wrote: Two things: First, Fox News is NOT a conservative network. Its simply that the others are so leftist that Fox looks conservative in contrast AND they allow PUNDITS who are conservative to voice their opinions, also at odds with the other news sources.

umm, I respectfully beg to differ...and FoxNews is on at my house most of the time. Their Internet newspage is my home page. The programs that make up the majority of their viewing audience are indeed conservative, but they do allow non-conservative points of view. If they were not conservative, do you think the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" would have been pushed the way it was? You is what you is, or you is not. If they are not conservative, then they are liberal. There is no "fair and balanced" in the media, although they do attempt to give both sides a chance, sort of. You ever hear Bill, or Hannity continually shut down a dissenting voice mid-sentence? You ever see them not do so?

Sorry, just not sure how you came to the conclusion that you did.

RJ

With conservatives like Bill O'Reilly, who supports gun confiscation "in emergencies" --such as the post Katrina gun confiscation-- you don't need as many liberals.

Heartland Patriot wrote:

johnson0317 wrote:I am at a loss. I feel so terrible for surviving family members. At the same time, I am angry because I know some dip is going to use this instance as "one more example" for why we need stricter gun laws. You know the Brady Center is going to be all over this. By the way, if you ever want to feel completely aggravated, go visit their site. You really do need to know what the enemy is up to. The way they can twist events to fit their agenda usually leaves me with my mouth open. I made a plea, last night, for people to join the NRA, and to support the NRA-ILA. This is one of our best ramparts against the flood of stupidity and ignorance

Here is a good example of why they are important. I just watched a clip of the Executive VP and CEO of the NRA, Wayne LaPierre, off of YouTube. It was an appearance he just put in on FoxNews, a conservative network. The anti-gun nuts are so effective that even the interviewer was swallowing the Kool-Aid. He was there to talk about the new BATFE requirement (and the attempt to deflect attention away from the Fast and Furious debacle) that dealers must report anyone who buys more than one long gun in a week. The gal interviewing him was honestly baffled as to why he would oppose such regulations if it might keep guns out of the hands of the criminal cartels. Wayne was very gracious and did not make her feel like a moron, and he could have! I am not sure she ever really understood what he was trying to say. Piece by piece, people, piece by piece. The right-wing, and the Obama administration are smart enough to know they can not get away with a full-scale assault on our second ammendment rights...they know they have to piecemeal it out. A little seemingly insignificant thing here, one there. The framers of our constitution knew the danger of a government that did not want its citizens armed. A government that does not want its people armed, does not have citizens, it has subjects.

RJ

Two things: First, Fox News is NOT a conservative network. Its simply that the others are so leftist that Fox looks conservative in contrast AND they allow PUNDITS who are conservative to voice their opinions, also at odds with the other news sources. Just trying to add some clarity on that one. Second, you are correct about incrementalism. That is exactly how the anti-firearm, anti-self-defense crowd did it in the UK, Australia, and Canada. A little at a time. Quite impossible, indeed, for them to go "door-to-door"...but if they can ever get Americans to buy off on doing it "for safety", then they take one step closer to their eventual goal of disarming the populace. They only care about "the masses" and not one whit about any individual who may suffer because they didn't have the means to defend themselves. It is a herd mentality that leftists have and it is also about control...control of you and me.

They don't care about the masses either --pretending to is just part of the strategy they use to get their way.

Our propaganda media that pretends to be a "news" media is working hand in hand with the pro-criminal anti-self defense crowd to advance the collectivist agenda, and I fear they are taking a toll. Their favored tactic is the lie by omission. How they do it with guns is very simple: stories about violence, like this one, or even just the threat of violence (like man with a gun stories that turn out to be mistakes), or just the misuse of a gun (gun in a kids backpack) , get national coverage, and sometimes even worldwide coverage. Legal uses of a gun in self-defense virtually never get national coverage (unless there is some aspect to the event that can be used to disparage it) --they stay at the local level. Over time this has the effect of leaving people who don't know anything about guns with the impression that they are only used by criminals. And that, of course, is the intention.

I no longer consider the collectivists as anti-gun though, I think that gives them too much credit. They're not really anti-gun --they want the authorities to have guns and they want criminals to have guns. They're anti-self defense. The anti-gun stuff is solely a backdoor tactic used to eliminate the right to self-defense. Politically it's a loser to say people shouldn't have the right do defend themselves; especially in the US, but I don't think it's a message what would be well received anywhere, even in an enfeebled country like the UK. So, they go after the means of self-defense instead. They'd straight up make it illegal for anyone to resist or injure a criminal if they could get away with it.

VMI77 wrote: With conservatives like Bill O'Reilly, who supports gun confiscation "in emergencies" --such as the post Katrina gun confiscation-- you don't need as many liberals.

Yeah, it is depressing that he has some views that I disagree with, but we have to be willing to support the first ammendment as much as the second. He has 20 million plus viewers, but I bet many of them absolutely disagree with him on that issue, plus some others. I find (and fire away!) that most conservatives can think well for themselves, unlike some other groups who need the latest soundbites to establish their position.

Think about this, however, and it is just my way of looking at things...if every commentator on Fox walked the straight right line, if they did not deviate from it all, then I would think the network unworthy of being on the air. It would mean one of several things. It could mean that they force their commentators to toe the line. It might mean that they have no intention of putting a balance in place. If the network was not imposing restrictions, it would mean that the people they hired are unable to think for themselves and have adopted right-wing politics en masse. I would rather have some balance there. I am, personally, smart enough to seperate the wheat from the chaff. I can think for myself and know when to disagree. At least on Fox, it is much less often than on MSNBC, or CNN. I can not even watch those networks for the amusement value anymore. FoxNews uses the "Fair and Balanced" line. If they did not provide some balance, some Alan Colmes, some Sheps, then they would simply be selling a lie. Besides, know your enemy and hold them closer than you hold your friends.

For every O'Reilly who has an ignorant stance on gun control, there are Glenn Becks who talk about packing heat when they went to the movies. Balance. O'Reilly entertains and informs, he does not legislate. I think his ability, despite his audience, to affect gun legislation is minimal.

RJ