"Lie-In" in the park urges more gun control in the U.S.
It was a protest of local citizens who demonstrated to bring attention to gun violence, urging the Florida Legislature and U.S. Congress to pass more common sense gun laws.
It was a "lie-in," where people against gun violence lied down in groups of 32 to recall the 32 innocent victims murdered at Virginia Tech last April. The groups remained lying for just a few minutes to highlight the short length of time it takes to purchase a gun in the U.S.
"Florida is doing little to protest its citizens against gun violence and is allowing dangerous people to have easy access to guns," said Dana S. Quist, the primary organizer of the Grove protest. "We need the United States Congress to do more at the federal level, too."
Cartoon by Brittany Williams
posted by Tom Falco at 8:00 AM
YOU MAY NOT LIFT THE PHOTOS & TEXT. IT'S COPYRIGHTED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. YOU CAN HOWEVER SHARE A STORY ON SOCIAL MEDIA BY USING THE LINKS HERE.
For linking to this one story, just click on the time it was posted & just this story will open for sharing - only through social media. Not copying and pasting.
41 Comments:
Thank you Dana Quist for positive efforts, well directed.
Yes, guns are a problem. I also think that equal efforts need to be focused on anger management and reducing poverty.
Although this was not the case at VT, they are universally common threads among violent offenders.
Yes Tony, it's call human nature. If there were no guns, they would use knives or sharp objects. If there were no knives or sharp objects, they would pick up a tree stump and club someone to death and if they hadn't figured out how to use a club yet, say about 100,000 years ago they would beat them with their fist and pound them with their fist & stomp on their heads until death. Again, it called human nature. My gun when used to protect myself and family is a beautiful powerful tool that if aimed properly makes a nice, neat, clean and fast little hole. Hitler didn't allow guns either. Human nature.
what in the flyng ef does that have to do with gun control laws anon 9:48. i gotta gun and a concealed carry. you're nuts if you don't think the guy at VT would've used a tree stump to kill 32 people.
Silk, 11:17, you ignorant idiot.
Gingues Kahn killed about 88,000 Roman soldiers with rocks tied to ropes, in just one day. The Rouge kill about 2.5 million Cambodians in about two years with clubs, picks, and shovels as they had very few bullets, that was less than 25 years ago, Hitler gassed millions and burned over one million Russians on the way to Liningrad. And anthropologist state that during human development, from apes to man about 37% of all pre-humans died from cracked skulls. You fool, if humans can find a gun they will use just about anything to harm their fellow man. A club is at close quarter, as is a sword, a knife, but with arrows and gun powder you could reach out far and wide and not have to look your enemy in the eye. Perhaps the key word here is cowardly.
No, not a club, someone like the one in Vt, if not a gun, perhaps a church or night club filled with people and then a little gasoline after putting his vehicle against one of two exit doors, ring a bell does it? Just yesterday. And lets not forget hanging, as in the South, 30's 40's 50's & 60's. Oh and yes the Mex/Amer border towns 10,000 killed since early 2008, about 1,200 had their hands, feet and heads cut off. Grape, perhaps you shouldn't bring up guns if your readers can't take reality!
Hey Silk, gave "THEM" your name, address, phone number and lots of personal info to get that gun permit? I personally know over 25 men and about 6 women who could drive your nose bone into your brain the moment in time you reached for your concealed weapon. Guns are not the problem; the problem is the way people rear their children or allow their children to be influenced during those early years. JC said what's important is last and what not important is first. Jesus was referring to children and their chief child care giver, the Mother, the woman as compared to money or the gold tables. "IF" "ALL" children were exposed to only the "GOOD" things no one would grow to adulthood and harm another living life form. Guns, or swords, or knives, or clubs, or fist, or some other object will continue to be used until human nature evolves.
Cheese and rice people - this is not a springboard for your personal soap-box rants. It's a local newsletter, letting people know what's going on in their community.
If you need to continue this debate GO SOMEWHERE ELSE! there are plenty of more appropriate places, and since you cannot seem to consider another's opinion, you find plenty of sights where only your personal point of view is discussed at the exclusion of all others, which is clearly what you desire.
With the amount of vitriol going back and forth with these people commenting (who are, take note, proud gun-wielding citizens) I'm a little concerned...
There is a definite case of blog-rage happening. Good thing they remain anonymous... "drive your nose bone into your brain..." !! Whoever actually formulated that thought, then chose to share that bit of vile, violent imagery with us - should never own a gun, or a club, a kitchen knife or a computer!
Someone please take the guns away from these highly-aggravated people!
This is a perfect case study supporting serious gun control! Seems it's already too late - dangerous people already have (easy access to) guns!
Yes, common sense does need to be applied in the case of gun laws. But why pass new laws when the current ones aren't being enforced?
Public safety and second amendment rights need to be carefully balanced. Both are in need of consideration.
Amen, good point, guns aren't the problem, people are. Hell, anyone can take a gun, rifle , stick, branch, a car, some gasoline or even their fist and go after another human; someone threw a shoe at the Pres of the U.S. of A. You say this is a local paper where local issues are the only point-----hey, wait a second, don't people get shot, stabed and attacked all over the Grove? Oh, go bury you head, is that it, no discussion about these life threatening issues you state. So, people should not train to push a nose bone into the brain of someone pointing a gun at them, is that it? You'd rather have lthem get a gun also, is that it?
Blog rage, cheese & rice people, Are you from Mars or the far side of the moon? If someone uses words that infer an image and you chose to call the image vile, then that's your take so it is your mind that is in the gutter. If I were someone capable of shoving a nose bone into the brain of someone aiming a gun at my Mother, Father, Wife, children, sister or brother or even an innocent woman, God give me the ability to shove it in a far as it would go and be done with the dirt bag. You call this vile? I call it Dirty Harry and Rambo all in one. Go hide under a flat rock.
It's worth pointing out that the Virginia Tech shootings happened on a campus that had been declared a "gun-free" zone by the school administration, thus preventing licensed, law-abiding students and teachers from carrying weapons that might have put an early end to that maniac's rampage. You will note, of course, that the ban on guns didn't seem to bother him.
In fact, many of the mass killings that have happened in this country have been in "gun-free" zones, where the killers know that they are least likely to be effectively challenged.
Frankly, I prefer to live in a world in which the law-abiding are permitted to be armed. At least the bad guys won't have a monopoly.
Btw, with regard to the cartoon's caption - I'm not aware that Florida has any "new gun laws." Am I missing something?
Ras T. Sounds like you're against violence, yet you state it's a good thing these hostile comments remain anonymous. That seems contrary. Would you care to share with us what you had in mind if they were not anonymous. By all means, please comment.
The cartoon refers to the gun laws that were passed in 2005, however it's still relevant considering that was merely a few years ago) the law basically states that you can shoot first, and ask questions later. If you think a person is a threat to you, they don't have to be pulling out a weapon but if you feel they are a threat to you then you may shoot them legally. That's the law, and it's absurd.
I think the gun laws need to be revised, the 2nd Amendment was intended to maintain a free and workable militia. This was Thomas Jefferson's feelings on the matter (as discussed in their correspondence) and he should have taken Madison's advice to explain these things better.
Guns aren't the problem? That's true, but the people who have ready access to them are the problem. That it's so easy to purchase a gun in the states is unbelievable. That people with rage issues (aka some of the above leaving comments) like the person who murdered the students/staff of VT can obtain a gun without any real hassle is disgusting. There needs to be greater restrictions on who and how one can purchase a fire arm.
Brittany W
Brittany:
You don't know what you're talking about.
First, the 2005 revision was to Florida's law of self-defense. It is not a firearms regulation in any sense of the word. Deadly force can be implicated whether one uses a gun, a baseball bat, or a frying pan. Thus, it is not a "new gun law."
Second, your characterization of the law is completely off-base. Yes, liberals and the Herald (but I repeat myself) have repeatedly characterized the standard as you have:
"the law basically states that you can shoot first, and ask questions later. If you think a person is a threat to you, they don't have to be pulling out a weapon but if you feel they are a threat to you then you may shoot them legally. That's the law, and it's absurd."That is most certainly not the law, and it is dangerous and irreponsible to go around mischaracterizing the law in such a fashion. Indeed, the only things that the law changed, with respect to deadly force, was that it eliminated the duty to retreat when you are anywhere outside your home, and it extended the "castle doctrine" to your vehicle. In other words, if you are in a place where you have a legal right to be, you are not required to retreat from a threat of deadly harm. And if you are attacked inside your vehicle, you are permitted to presume an imminent threat of death or severe bodily harm.
Of course, in any situation that may arise where you act in self defense, you cannot use deadly force unless you are attacked and you reasonably perceive an imminent threat of death or grave bodily harm. It is not a subjective standard, as you suggest ("I felt threatened!"). The fear of death or severe bodily harm must be objectively reasonable. But this has been the standard for use of deadly force in self-defense in Florida for years.
So please, grow up a little and don't use a straw man argument when attacking a position you disagree with.
Swelp & Others----what is important is this....what you can convince a jury and/or judge took place, including your fear. For example, to push and stretch all of the rhetoric on this one issue is this, I do not have to wait to be attacked physically. Previous encounter(s) with an aggressive individual, he or she is walking up to you on the street and you suspect a vicious, possible life threatening physical and possible deadly attack----I do not have to wait to be attacked physically; sure you would have to make this decision in one or two seconds, one or two seconds to save your life, that of your family or save your brain from being knocked senseless, hospitalized, incapiacated, knocked down and stomped on. Don't tell me the vast majority of human beings around the world do not know when this is about to take place. I know for sure when this is taking place, I am an expert on this subject matter. Why do you think all of these people are going around killing people all over the world these days. They got damn tired of being persecuted so they strike out at what one might think are innocents. Where was humanity when they were being persecuted? Where was a helping hand, a human who would get involved? What humanity is presently receiving for this form of transgression is but a very minor piece of a gigantic iceberg. Humanity has seen nothing yet!
P.S. The "castle doctrine" does not apply if you are attacked in your car or home by someone who has a legal right to be there - i.e., a family member, co-tenant, or invitee. In such a situation, the objective standard would still apply.
Thanks people. I've seen the words "straw man" being used several times and I had no idea until now, when I saw it and then google it. What a great thing to learn about; I've wondered for years now what the hell was that person talking about, I didn't say that and now I know there is a whole field of arguement behind such posturing.
No one has a legal right to be in my or another persons face. "Castle Doctrine" "Objective Standard", bull shit. The adrenaline being pumped throughout my body from my natural five senses would not waste time on thinking about your Castle Doctrine & Objective Standards----like I said, I'd be thinking about what I was going to tell a judge and/or jury for shoving the transgressors nose bone up and into his or hers face. The chances are I'll be around a lot longer than your kind. Further, I know when to allow my entire DNA and body parts to pump adrenaline.
Does anybody else think that Anon at 5:58 p.m. is a troll?
Let's have a show of hands. Class?
*Raises hand*
I hate to say it but, agree or disagree with him or not about guns, Swlip is the only one spitting fact here in a non-threatening manner without trying to sound like an internet toughguy.
I am not a fan of guns nor how easy they are to obtain. They are dangerous in the wrong hands but everyone has a right to own one. I do enjoy guns for recreational use but dont own one myself nor do I have a desire to.
Yes, of course straw man, troll, to lure other internet users into responses to carefully designed statements. Absolutely. However, the key word in "troll" are "incorrect" statements. It is not incorrect for me to defend my life or that of my family. Straw man, I never said I was an internet toughguy straw man, I said I would defend myself and you threw in some straw man lies. You don't like it when I say I would defend myself do you? Sounds like you are saying you can do what you want and I can't do anything about it, right straw man? Come on and tell me what your plan of attack is this time. Display your rhetorical aggression and ask others to join in with you. Like to spread a little tumult would you?
You enjoy guns for recreational use, but do not own one yourself, nor have a desire to do so, pray tell, where can you rent guns? Seriously, but don't list the location where you can rent a gun so that some nut case can go out and lease a gun to accomplish some dasterly deed. All of you should listen to yourselves.
Indeed. At the time of WWII, George Orwell concluded that pacifism was objectively pro-fascist. Preemptive surrender only encourages the bad guys.
Anon at 11:36 pm - I have no idea what you're on about. Are you well?
Anon at 11:41 pm - The Ace Pro indoor range in Doral rents guns for use on their range. You can't take them off-premises.
Anon @ 11:41 - My friends own guns and we will go to shooting ranges and skeet courses throughout SoFL. At most skeet courses they have 12 and 20-gauge shotguns for daily rental. Its not something I thought I would enjoy but I do. Its a skill to hit a clay target flying thru the air. Its also helped me to get over my fear of firearms. I used to get queasy just by looking at a police officers holstered weapon because of the thought of how fast such an item could end someone else's life. I'll say it again, Im not a big fan of firearms and dont own one myself but I dont think that I shouldnt have the right to own one nor should others. Besides, I havent perfected my nose-skull-crushing technique like some other ninjas that commented here...
It's not nose-skull-crushing and the ninjas use swords, knives, spikes and other devices, rather it's just a quick hand open arm thrust forward, namely used on men trying to over power a woman with no weapons involved. I've used it twice myself. Felt good!
There was plenty of "common sense" written into the Constitution. It's important to note too, that the authors of that brilliant document had just defeated hellacious tyranny-- with guns-- and that they rigged an enforcement clause to land right after the right to free speech. That arrangement wasn't by accident. "Common sense" would dictate that the behavior, not the implement, be addressed. An implement is always available to execute the deed of the misbehaver. They're called hands.
Anonymous 11:54, You used the arm thrust move on two different men who were attempting to overpower you.
Did this occur in Coconut Grove?
I admire your skills. Most women could not do that. I hope that those two slobs aren't going around abusing women anymore!
In response to my stand on violence; yeps, I am against violence. Are you for it? is anyone in their right mind pro-violence, or is it anti-pacifism?
It was tongue-in-cheek that I thought the ranters best remain anonymous... Imagine if they ran into each other in front of George's, both packing concealed weapons... Showdown on Commodore Plaza!
Tony, not in the Grove, one in Key West and one in Fort Pierce and it was partly my fault for being in two bars unescorted both times and of course involving alcohol with two strangers on separate occasions. Overpowering me, not really a physical force thing, more about touching without permission. But the move most definitely made a difference, I recommend it because you do not have to be big and strong to use it and it is very powerful. Brought pain and blood both times.
Yes, smaller than an elephant, smaller than a horse, but bigger than your nose bone.
Anon is just funning and trolling with this nose bone thing, the people who have a nasty hostile reaction are the ones you'd have to look out for and be careful of.
...bigger than my nose bone. Hmmmm?
No offense Ras T, as you can read, seriously, surely you can accept this proposition as close to the truth. Relax, just trolling on the Internet. Please don't get caught up in my disdain as I find blogging to be an interesting method of communication as I normally face people eyeball to eyeball. I've never known another way. I enjoy this kind of encounter. Very safe.
No personal offense taken... however you must admit your rhetoric could, maybe, quite possibly be somewhat offensive to kinder, gentler folk who prefer sipping ice tea on the front porch rather than puzzling over violent nose-bone references.
Next time you feel a wave of disdain for others come over you, try not to let it get the better of you... We all suspect there's sumthing very kind, sweet and gentle behind the raging posts you share.
You a gang member Ras T? You're a plural, not a we. I noticed before you requested a show of hands. Afraid to stand alone and take a stand? Like tumult do you? A group of people nailed God's son to a cross suffering a very, very slow death. My post are not rants straw man! The Grape has the same affect as sprinkling fairy dust on gold fish bowls and pins filled with sheep----don't tap the bowls or shake the pins and awaken the catatonic who stand alone in reality and only aggregate in mass using a fictious name to cause some individual as much harm as can be accomplished by a tumultous cowardly crowd. Come on straw man, say something and prove me correct.
Anon 8:10, you mean Ras T is singular, otherwise you should have used a question mark at the end of that sentence, but, we, my family and I agree we understand your point. Tumult is always caused by individuals who seek courage in large numbers and generally not much backbone as individuals.
Ras T assumes/invents a lot from comments that do not contain any inference to his assumptions. For example T infers that someone is ranting when in fact is just stating a point of view, like T is doing, so is T ranting also? And then T assumes this ranter is somehow a kind, gentle & sweet individual. Why? Obviously the nose bone references are from a female and it appears this anon is a male, yet T portrays them as one. Anon appears to be an individual and T wants to appear as a group against the individual.
The interesting subject matter is that postings like this obtain so many more comments than the mundane. Does T have a hidden agenda?
So, sit on your porch and sip tea and quit bitching about those of us to want to quibble a little on this blog.
I may need to get a gun. You people scare the shit outta me! I do not feel safe sipping anything on my front porch with wacks like you running rampant and ranting! (Yes, for the first time this comment, mine, is a rant)
p.s. Take note: I was not the one asking for a show of hands, so your last comment referencing my need for a crowd is completely ungrounded – much like yourself.
To the same(?) anon insistent on trying (quite unsuccessfully to verbally) attack me - your shameful and embarrassing lack of literacy is astounding! And, on a very personal note from the RAS T – you utterly disgust me!
I digress, I do not believe for one second more that there is a kind gentle person under your ignoramus façade. Go Fck yo'self!
BTW - I'm a chick!
Post a Comment
<< Home