Interesting if True.

[Caustic Burno]

446 school age children shot in Chicago so far this year with strongest gun laws in country – media silent


The cesspool known as Chicago probably has the toughest gun laws in the country, yet despite all the shootings, murders, and bloodshed, you never hear a peep about this from the corrupt state run media. In Chicago, there have been 446 school age children shot in leftist utopia run by Rahm Emanuel and that produced Obama, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, etc. 62 school aged children have actually been killed by crazed nuts in Chicago so far this year with almost two weeks to go. So why isn't this news worthy? Is it because it would embarrass those anti second amendment nuts who brag about Chicago's tough gun laws? Is it because most of the kids who were shot and killed were minorities? Or is it because the corrupt media doesn't want to show Chicago in a bad light? Amazingly, no Obama crocodile tears either.

For those of you too dense to get the point of this post, it's to make the point about gun laws. No matter how tough the gun laws are, the crazed, nut jobs will find a way to get them and if they so chose, use them. No draconian law can stop this, no matter how well intentioned the law is, or if it's just about leftists grabbing power from citizens and taking away their constitutional rights.

THE LIST OF MURDERED SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN 2012

18 YEARS OLD- 15

17 YEARS OLD- 16

16 YEARS OLD- 16

15 YEARS OLD- 6

14 YEARS OLD- 4

13 YEARS OLD- 2

12 YEARS OLD- 1

7 YEARS OLD- 1

6 YEARS OLD- 1

446 School Age Children Shot in Chicago so Far This Year

THE LIST OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN SHOT IN 2012

18 year old- 110

17 year old- 99

16 year old- 89

15 year old- 62

14 year old- 39

13 year old- 21

12 year old- 10

11 year old- 2

10 year old- 3

9 year old- 1

7 year old- 3

6 year old- 2

5 year old- 1

4 year old- 1

3 year old- 1

1 year old- 2

 

[3waycross]

:tiphat:

 

[slick4591]

Here's something that got very little attention. I think this occurred 3 days after the Newton shooting. Notice a gun stopped the shooter.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_ ... 122668.php

 

[snake67]

It is all about the votes and the money

Politicians want votes and media wants to sell copy

Makes me sound a bit bitter - but reality is - follow the money and follow the votes

Nothing more

Best to all

Bez

 

[denvermartinfarms]

I don't have any numbers, but i am pretty sure that more people get killed every year by drunk drivers than guns, and i have not heard anything said about banning alkohol or cars. Has anyone else?

 

[Ryder]

They believe that banning certain guns and high capacity magazines would stop the killing of chldren and I guess other people. So it would be a crime to have these guns and magazines.
My idea is to just make it illegal to kill people. Seems that would be a simpler solution. :roll:

 

[Jogeephus]

They believe that banning certain guns and high capacity magazines would stop the killing of chldren and I guess other people. So it would be a crime to have these guns and magazines.
My idea is to just make it illegal to kill people. Seems that would be a simpler solution. :roll:

Or make it illegal to possess guns on school grounds. :banana:

 

[Bigfoot]

Back in the day I've seen guys with a double action revolver and a couple of speed loaders get of 18 rounds pretty fast. I can't imagine we would be safer limiting magazine capacity.

 

[Caustic Burno]

You read Frankenstien's bill and about the only thing legal is a single shot.

 

[Red Bull Breeder]

Well fellars its a shame when younguns is a getting killed off the way they are no matter if its a school shooting or on the street. Them in Chicago and New york is sure cutting in them gun control peoples voting public.

 

[Ryder]

You read Frankenstien's bill and about the only thing legal is a single shot.

And that will be the next thing if they can get what they want. :stop:

 

[tom4018]

I don't have any numbers, but i am pretty sure that more people get killed every year by drunk drivers than guns, and i have not heard anything said about banning alkohol or cars. Has anyone else?

Here is some old data.

http://gunowners.org/fs0404.htm

Another good read.

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/5335

Limit magazine size is about the same as telling you how much horsepower your car or truck can have.

 

[Dega Moo]

Hmmmm? I guess I don't see how this post is helpful.

The horror of Newtown is that 20 first graders were killed at the same time and the same place and that place was suppose to be very safe for children that age. There would be something wrong with us individually and as a society if we weren't willing to look at all available options in order to prevent this from happening again. All options must be considered: including controls on assault rifles and clips; including armed teachers and guards at our schools. While the Chicago shootings and murders are tragic and horrible in their own right, your example and the murders in Newtown are not at all comparable and confuse two distinct issues. It seems to me your post is intent on stifling any discussion of solutions which may include gun control.

I own two shotguns and two rifles, neither being an assault rifle. I don't own handguns at this time. I strongly support the second amendment and agree with the US Supreme Court ruling that we individually have the right to own and bear arms. I also believe there must be some limit to the definition of arms we can own and bear. However, there are so many assault guns in private hands today that I think it impossible to control them effectively.

While I don't know the answer, I believe if we find one it will result from a national dialog and debate. I do know the answer will not be found by minimizing the horror, blaming the media or attempting to confuse the issue.

 

[3waycross]

Hmmmm? I guess I don't see how this post is helpful.

The horror of Newtown is that 20 first graders were killed at the same time and the same place and that place was suppose to be very safe for children that age. What's really sad is that nobody did diddly about actually making it or any school safe for those babies. In fact well meaning individuals have gone out of your way to make it a kill zone by disarming those who would and could protect them.
There would be something wrong with us individually and as a society if we weren't willing to look at all available options in order to prevent this from happening again. All options must be considered: including controls on assault rifles and clips; including armed teachers and guards at our schools. While the Chicago shootings and murders are tragic and horrible in their own right, your example and the murders in Newtown are not at all comparable and confuse two distinct issues. It seems to me your post is intent on stifling any discussion of solutions which may include gun control.
Well then if you believe that new legislation is needed how about if we make it illegal to carry a GUN of any kind in a school zone,(didn't work), or how about if we make it illegal to kill people period(doesn't work). I could go on and on and give you example after example of how passing laws against violence simply do not work. That being the case WHY do you think a ban on "assault weapons" or "hi cap magazines" would work.

I own two shotguns and two rifles, neither being an assault rifle. I don't own handguns at this time. I strongly support the second amendment and agree with the US Supreme Court ruling that we individually have the right to own and bear arms. I also believe there must be some limit to the definition of arms we can own and bear. However, there are so many assault guns in private hands today that I think it impossible to control them effectively.
That's good since the point of the second ammendent is not your right to own a hunting rifle. It is VERY specific and very broad at the same time. The words "shall not infringe" are the whole of the second ammendent. While I don't know the answer, I believe if we find one it will result from a national dialog and debate. I do know the answer will not be found by minimizing the horror, blaming the media or attempting to confuse the issue.

There is a national dialogue and debate so if you want to TALK go find someone who wants to talk about what YOU think is necessary. I personally do not own an "assault" rifle. But i sure as he[[ respect the right of every honest non felon American to own one to protect his life and his property from those who would harm him or take what is his.

And while i am at it let me be the first to welcome you to Cattle Today. I want to make sure and thank you for making your first post on a CATTLE FORUM all about gun control. Good analogy eh? Gun control from out newest TROLL

BTW i apologize for not answering your original question. Those of us who don't spend all our waking hours sucking on a strawfull of gun control :bs: find it refreshing to see someone (Caustic in this case) post something besides the cr@p the lamestream media spouts about murder statistics. I hope you found that answer helpful in your quest for enlightenment!

 

[Ouachita]

I think the new poster brings up some valid points that we should all digest and consider over a period of time. I would also recommend that everybody tread lightly, or not at all. Preferrably, not at all.

 

[MO_cows]

The sad truth of it is, there are so many senseless shootings in Chicago, it isn't newsworthy any more. When it happens over and over and over, it isn't hot breaking news. The part that should make people stop and think is, Chicago/Illinois has some of the strictest gun laws. Hmmm, then why is there so much gun violence? Same thing in DC. Anybody with half a brain should be able to look around and figure out that banning anything only keeps it out of the hands of the honest law abiding citizens. Anyone else, they will figure out how to get it. Have we learned nothing from Prohibition and the war on drugs?

I think the feds need to sit down and shut up about it and let local school districts come up with their own solutions to school security that fit their locale. There is no "one size fits all" solution and that is why the feds shouldn't be meddling in education in the first place.

Dega Moo, your post just reads too much like a script.

 

[Jogeephus]

I think the new poster brings up some valid points that we should all digest and consider over a period of time. I would also recommend that everybody tread lightly, or not at all. Preferably, not at all.

I agree. However, lets keep in mind the intent of the second amendment. It was not put in place to insure that we would be able to hunt or shoot skeet, it was put there to give us the ability to overthrow an abusive government - one which would seek to take away our rights as guaranteed in the constitution.

Have we not learned anything from history? In the 20th century alone, gun control has led to the disarmament and murder of millions. This is what Adams, Jefferson and others sought to prevent. Tyranny. Jefferson said it best when he said, "any society who would trade their liberty for security deserves neither".

But I agree we need to do something with the crime rate in this country. The answer is quite simple in my view. First, we do away with concurrent prison terms, then we make prisoners serve their full terms rather than a third and when and if the parole board sees fit to review their case then the parole board should be held personally liable in civil court for any and all damages that the early release may have caused.

As for preventing the acts of a madman. I think it impossible. Afterall, when the strongest military in the world cannot protect its own headquarters from a plane then how on earth is the same government going to protect little old you from a madman? Its not going to happen. I think tragedy has reminded us that freedom comes with a price. Its not always paid with the blood of a soldier in some far away land but it is sometimes paid right here in our own backyard. Have we as a people become so soft that we are willing to sacrifice over 200 hundred years of freedom bought and paid for with our ancestors' blood, sweat and tears because a lone madman killed a some innocents - I think not.

 

[Calman]

Our right to bear arms was written up so we the people could protect ourselves from a government taking over our rights and ruling over us.
With these new proposed laws in the making we will no longer be capable of that since we will be out gunned by our government.
Now I can honestly tell you I have never (in civilian life) used a gun of mine in an assult.
So therefore having many rifles and pistols in my life I've never personally owned an assult weapon.
It just rubs me the wrong way to hear the way people use the word assualt weapon.
Really! does a rifle that auto loads make it an assualt weapon because it loads itself?
does having more rounds in the magazine make it an assualt rifle?
And while I'm in a ranting mood another thing that rubs me the wrong way is people refering to our fighting men and women in the armed forces as "our boys and girls".
People when they picked up that weapon to fight for our country they are no longer boys or girls. They are men and women don't care what age they are.
I can tell you about growing up overnight in a foriegn country at the age of nineteen.

Sorry folks about the ranting and raving.

Cal

 

[Isomade]

I think the new poster brings up some valid points that we should all digest and consider over a period of time. I would also recommend that everybody tread lightly, or not at all. Preferably, not at all.

I agree. However, lets keep in mind the intent of the second amendment. It was not put in place to insure that we would be able to hunt or shoot skeet, it was put there to give us the ability to overthrow an abusive government - one which would seek to take away our rights as guaranteed in the constitution.

Have we not learned anything from history? In the 20th century alone, gun control has led to the disarmament and murder of millions. This is what Adams, Jefferson and others sought to prevent. Tyranny. Jefferson said it best when he said, "any society who would trade their liberty for security deserves neither".

But I agree we need to do something with the crime rate in this country. The answer is quite simple in my view. First, we do away with concurrent prison terms, then we make prisoners serve their full terms rather than a third and when and if the parole board sees fit to review their case then the parole board should be held personally liable in civil court for any and all damages that the early release may have caused.

As for preventing the acts of a madman. I think it impossible. Afterall, when the strongest military in the world cannot protect its own headquarters from a plane then how on earth is the same government going to protect little old you from a madman? Its not going to happen. I think tragedy has reminded us that freedom comes with a price. Its not always paid with the blood of a soldier in some far away land but it is sometimes paid right here in our own backyard. Have we as a people become so soft that we are willing to sacrifice over 200 hundred years of freedom bought and paid for with our ancestors' blood, sweat and tears because a lone madman killed a some innocents - I think not.

:clap: :clap:

 

[Calman]

I think the new poster brings up some valid points that we should all digest and consider over a period of time. I would also recommend that everybody tread lightly, or not at all. Preferably, not at all.

I agree. However, lets keep in mind the intent of the second amendment. It was not put in place to insure that we would be able to hunt or shoot skeet, it was put there to give us the ability to overthrow an abusive government - one which would seek to take away our rights as guaranteed in the constitution.

Have we not learned anything from history? In the 20th century alone, gun control has led to the disarmament and murder of millions. This is what Adams, Jefferson and others sought to prevent. Tyranny. Jefferson said it best when he said, "any society who would trade their liberty for security deserves neither".

But I agree we need to do something with the crime rate in this country. The answer is quite simple in my view. First, we do away with concurrent prison terms, then we make prisoners serve their full terms rather than a third and when and if the parole board sees fit to review their case then the parole board should be held personally liable in civil court for any and all damages that the early release may have caused.

As for preventing the acts of a madman. I think it impossible. Afterall, when the strongest military in the world cannot protect its own headquarters from a plane then how on earth is the same government going to protect little old you from a madman? Its not going to happen. I think tragedy has reminded us that freedom comes with a price. Its not always paid with the blood of a soldier in some far away land but it is sometimes paid right here in our own backyard. Have we as a people become so soft that we are willing to sacrifice over 200 hundred years of freedom bought and paid for with our ancestors' blood, sweat and tears because a lone madman killed a some innocents - I think not.

Well spoken Jo I agree with you 100%.

Cal