Good post on gun control on FB, starting to go viral
This guy, Josh Fielder, posted his thoughts on FB about the gun control issue, and it's starting to go viral because so many people think it's a well-researched thoughful post. Even most people who disagree with him have been civil!
So far, it has over 65k likes, shared by over 41k, and i imagine more people have "liked" it where it was re-shared. If you're on FB and like his post, please go "like" it. I think he'll get a kick out of seeing so many people appreciate it.
Few hours ago, Fielder posted on his wall that he's amazed at the reaction to a status update! LOL!
I'm posting his original post in its entirety here because not everyone at DU does FB. I'm sure Fielder won't mind. 
https://www.facebook.com/Josh.Fielder/posts/4048262014066
So, here's my two cents (which will end up being closer to $1.50 I'm sure) and I'm sure I will regret posting this later, due to the "friends" I will lose while exercising my First Amendment, but here goes.
Instead of posting a meme with a picture and a falsely attributed quote or a made up statistic, I've spent my time researching the gun violence/gun control debate. And I'd like to talk about some of the pervasive themes I've seen lately.
First off, Hitler did not say "In order to conquer a country, you must first disarm its citizens." In fact, Hitler made it his position to enable guns to be obtained more easily. http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/disarm.asp
Secondly, the presidents, and I mean ALL of them, and their families, receive death threats on a daily basis. President Obama did not enact the regulations that REQUIRE Secret Service protection for him and his family. If you believe your children are as much of a target as the president's children, then you have a self inflated idea of your position in this world. http://www.secretservice.gov/protection.shtml
Thirdly, there is NO law or bill being considered that would allow anyone to come marching into your home to take your legally obtained and legally owned firearms. There are possible laws that are being explored that would require more responsibility on the part of the gun owner or person purchasing a gun (i.e. pass a background check even if buying a gun from a gun show dealer). If you buy a car from a dealer it must be registered (a record of the transfer is documented). If you buy a car from a private citizen, it must be registered. If you buy a gun from a dealer, there is a record of that sale and it is registered. So how is it illogical to require the same for private sales of firearms?
Fourth, there are not more people being killed with baseball bats than guns. If you disagree with that because you saw a picture stating otherwise on the internet, then I would like to offer you the chance to buy some oceanfront property in Arizona and I'll throw in the Brooklyn Bridge for free. There is no magical solution for solving the problem of gun violence. THAT is what we need to solve. http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/baseballbats.asp
We don't ban cars that are used in DUI related deaths, but we do enact regulations regarding blood alcohol limits, prosecute people who enable a drunk driver to operate a vehicle after serving them, promote a DUI campaign raising awareness and educating drivers on the dangers of driving while intoxicated. All of which has reduced DUI related fatalities by over 40% in a decade. http://www.centurycouncil.org/drunk-driving/drunk-driving-statistics
The media is not hiding other gun related stories because they want to sensationalize the problem, they are simply unable to cover every gun death story because there would be an average of 80 of them each day. So they concentrate (unfortunately) on the massacres which I think we can all agree, happen all too often.
I find the fact that more children are killed in the US by guns than in the entire Middle East region, very disturbing.
I find it disturbing that the NRA blames the rise in violent shootings on video games and then comes out with its own shooting video game (categorized for children as young as 4 years of age) less than a month after Newtown.
I find it disturbing that other countries spend in excess of twice as much as the US on violent video games and have a small fraction of the amount of gun related deaths/injuries.
I find it disturbing that instead of looking for a solution to a problem like Newtown, there are people wasting their time and energy by trying to turn it into a conspiracy theory.
I find it disturbing that guns are the third largest killer of children ages 5-14 in the US.
I find it disturbing that a child in America is 12 times more likely to be killed with a gun than the rest of the "developed" world.
I find it disturbing that there are more guns privately owned in America than the next SEVENTEEN countries combined.
I find it disturbing that all of these statistics are not discussed but fake statistics about a baseball bat death rate are plastered everywhere.
I find it disturbing that some people believe that the ONLY answer to this problem is more guns.
Banning all firearms is NOT the answer, which is exactly why it's not being proposed. This country has enacted laws that didn't work before, so they've been revised, repealed, reformed, etc. It's ludicrous to think that as a society, we evolve, but the laws governing us cannot? The NRA states that the assault weapons ban didn't work the first time. Well, you know what they say, "If at first you don't succeed, f*%k it.".
If armed guards are the only answer to ending school shootings, then explain the VT shooting. Virginia Tech had an entire police department complete with a SWAT unit. Explain Columbine, which had an armed officer on staff. When discussing an end to gun violence in schools, there should be NOTHING left off of the table.
Ronald Reagan, a huge gun proponent and signor of the Brady Bill, wrote to Congress in 1994 asking them to propose legislation limiting or stopping altogether the manufacture of guns classified as assault weapon. And anyone saying "assault weapon" is a made up term should remember that every word in every language is, in fact, made up.
And yes, criminals don't typically obey laws, but we still have them. Can you use that logic to say there should be none at all? No.
Let me be clear, I am NOT anti gun. I have nothing against guns or responsible gun owners. I served proudly in the military, I worked in armed security, I've hunted, and enjoy target shooting since I was a kid. And I'm sure most gun enthusiasts are the same way. However, this issue should be discussed logically and rationally, and all I see are comments and pictures that are anything but rational and for the most part, are just viral, inflammatory, unresearched, vitriol.
The president enacted 23 executive actions today, of which only 2 have anything to do with limiting the availability of a category of gun or a magazine capacity. The remaining 21 deal with aspects regarding background checks, school safety and mental health system requirements and deficiencies. Will it be a perfect solution? No. Will it help? We'll see. Is it better than doing nothing? Definitely. If we keep using the statement, "It's too soon to talk about it." after each tragedy, pretty soon, we'll never talk about it.
OK, so maybe it ended up closer to $2.00 instead of 2 cents. So sue me.
= new reply since forum marked as read
I'm running though his FB rant and, yeah, I can agree with a lot of it.
It's obvious.
Doesn't take a rocket surgeon.
But when I got to this I knew I was onto someone without a grasp of data interpretation:
WTF does that even mean, absent a 'per capita' or 'per square mile' qualification?
Hey Josh with the viral FB posting....
Meh.
Your response = nit-pickery at its very finest. Meh.
Or do you think that's an accurate statement?
But go ahead and like it and post it to your timeline.
It won't do squat except for spread misinformation.
Carry on...
what side you are on in this debate. Carry on... 
I've written elsewhere on this board where I stand and I'll bet you haven't a clue what I've said about an AWB and magazine capacity and mandatory checks and the gun show loophole.
What I dread are the low information Facebook warriors who post misinformation and then the way some people get all gooey over it and think they're going to change the world by pressing the "Like" button.
And then, too often, that's all they do.
You obviously know very little about different firearms.
The Mossberg 500 is a perfectly legal hunting and defense weapon in every state and it's a SINGLE SHOT design.
Now just what is wrong with that?
Is it an AR15? No.
Is it even semi-automatic? No?
You carry on with yourself, there's no shame in responsible gun ownership.
Eloquently stated, me thinks.
"Hey Josh with the viral FB posting.... Meh."
I used to give things the old "meh" also when they didn't tow the lines of my sacred cows.
"WTF does that even mean, absent a 'per capita' or 'per square mile' qualification?"
I think it means that more guns are privately owned in American than the next seventeen countries combined... 
I try to be better than that, but for some perfect stranger who isn't a member here-- well, it doesn't bother me so much.
The specifics of Josh's FB rant, which is a fine rant mind you, don't stand up to scrutiny and I felt obliged to point it out.
For example, the president did NOT issue executive orders as Josh said. That's actually an NRA RW talking point.
Still, because of the emotional nature of the writing, it gets all this attention.
We need to work from a solid foundation based on facts, not on emotional postings on Facebook.
BTW, I was just talking with my sister about recent trips to NOLA and my favorite musical moment ever, Marlon Jordan at the Bombay Club...
Best trio (turned quartet later in the evening) ever!
I understand your frustration at so many people shining lights on this sacred cow and it finally being discussed on a national level, but I don't really understand your confusion between "safe" and "safer", unless it's merely the dogma of that sacred cow forcing you to conflate the two... dogma can can often prevent us from seeing inconvenient nuance. I saw that first-hand at a baptist church many years ago.
You're out of your element, Donny.
a Voice of Reason 
In order to make any true progress on the issue of gun violence in our nation it would be wise if all gun control advocates banned the use of the word "ban" when referring to future federal gun laws.
That one simple word is causing many gun owners to ignore any reasonable ideas purposed by the gun control side of the debate and instead to start talking about "jack booted thugs" or blue helmeted UN troops going house to house, confiscating firearms and sending their owners to clandestine FEMA reeducation camps for "reeducation."
Gun owners fearing a total ban or confiscation are running down to their local gun stores and buying everything in sight including all the ammo. They feel that if you have any desire to buy a firearm it is wise to buy it now. Consequently some very lethal firearms are ending up in the hands of people who have little or no use for them or experience in how to safely handle such weapons. I fear many will not be stored properly in gun safes and might be stolen and end up on our streets in criminal hands. We should be trying to reduce the number of firearms in the wrong hands through better laws but instead we are causing the sales of these weapons to skyrocket instead. We are effectively shooting ourselves in the foot.
I seriously can't believe some of the total bullshit I have heard recently about Obama and how he intends to destroy our nation. It is true that he is far more liberal than conservative Americans would prefer but he does not plan to repeal the 2nd Amendment or redistribute all the wealth of the 1% to those on welfare. When I mention this to other gun owners they yell at me that Obama wants to take away our guns and once he accomplishes this he will tear up the Constitution and pass laws so he can be President forever. I know some well educated and intelligent gun owners who actually believe this shit. It's driving me crazy!
When the word "ban" is mentioned when discussing Federal gun control it is like throwing gasoline on a simmering fire. The simple political reality is that at the best a future assault weapons ban will not truly "ban" these weapons but might involve better regulation of them . Why not simply avoid the term "ban" and instead say "better regulate"? Our leaders should be telling people that if they are honest, sane and responsible citizens that our government is not going to confiscate their firearms.
Now for those of you who do wish to ban firearms I suggest you work at your state level. New York just passed a very strong gun control law so perhaps you can pass a much stronger law in your state.
Of course I would also like to caution the extreme right to turn down their rhetoric. If they fire up a few very dangerous people and cause them to launch an insurrection it will be quickly squashed as it has little support from 95% of our citizens. Of course if a minor rebellion does occur we will undoubtedly have some truly draconian gun laws in the future. I also have some serious worry that some nut case or small group may try to assassinate Obama or another public official. If that does happen the far right wing commentators may have blood on their hands.
It would also help if the news media reported the facts about this issue without lies and distortions. For example rifles similar to the AR-15 are not "killing machines" but are used for competitive target shooting at the national level and hunting and may be a good choice for a self defense weapon in a rural environment. It is true that you don't need a hi-capacity magazine to hunt deer and states that do allow deer hunting with a semi-auto rifle have a limit on the amount of rounds you can have in the magazine (usually five). In states like Florida which have a high population of feral pigs hunters do use AR-15s with 20 or 30 round magazines. Feral pigs are not native to our nation and do a considerable amount of damage to the environment and therefore are considered pests. They are also quite intelligent and have been known to attack humans. You definitely do not wish to come between a mother boar and her piglets.
Wild boar
***snip***
Aggression toward humans
Wild boar attacks on humans are not common but do occur occasionally. Usually, boars, like most wild animals, will avoid interactions with humans. Due to the clearing of natural boar habitats, the number of interactions, including aggressive ones, between humans and boars has increased. When dealing aggressively with a human, boars will charge at them. Sometimes, these may be bluff charges but, in other cases, violent contact will be made. While the impact of the large, hard-skulled head may cause considerable damage itself, most damage is inflicted by the boar's tusk. When ramming into a person, the boar will slash the tusks upwards, creating sizeable open lacerations on the skin. Due to the height of the boar relative to a human, most wounds are inflicted to the upper legs. Some attacks are provoked, such as when hunters wound a boar which then counterattacks. Male boars become most aggressive during the mating season and may charge at humans at such times. Occasionally, female boars will attack if they feel their piglets are threatened, especially if a human physically comes between them and their young. Although a majority of boar attack victims recover with medical treatment, fatalities do occasionally occur.[45]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_boar
What I am basically suggesting is that both sides of the gun control issue tone down a bit and treat each other with some respect and honesty. If that happens, which is probably unlikely, we might actually pass some meaningful legislation that will help curb gun violence and mass murders.
I can always hope.
