Jump to content

What's with the ads?


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,246 Excellent

About OrganicJen

  • Rank
    Hive Mind Queen Bee

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Contact Methods

  • Location
  1. My perspective is different. I feel like 1 was too many. I remember after Columbine that all I heard at first was that this is unacceptable and our country would not stand for this and there would be sweeping reform to make sure it couldn't happen again. But then we did stand for it, and there wasn't sweeping reform, and from my perspective it just feels like we've decided that this is America where we have certain individual liberties and by the way, your kid may get shot but that's the price we pay. I don't feel any number of school shootings are okay and I think after one we entered the realm of "a lot." I just have a different perspective about what is a lot of kids getting shot. It is definitely a complicated isdue but going back to the all or nothing thing, I just think when we always find a reason that a solution isn't perfect instead of giving in and making some sacrifices in order to stop our kid's from being sacrificed, we just won't make progress and it keeps shifting the focus from our kids right to life, to our right to bear arms. I really believed what I was hearing after Columbine that there would be sweeping reform but it feels like we just decided the consequences of sweeping reform were too great.
  2. I would not expect to be left in a situation where my livestock could be killed and nothing could be done about it, my point is that if I as a private citizen could not own a gun to protect them anymore, I would be okay with someone who is employed for that purpose doing it instead. I would expect there would have to be certain jobs where guns would be required even if private citizens couldn't have them. I'm wouldn't think our country would agree to me not owning a gun anymore without a solution for protecting my livestock and I would be fine having to have a livestock predator management official allowed to have guns and pay them to do it for me if it came to that. I'm fine with changes like that if it's what has to be done. We have mountain lions and bears and our cows are small dexters but if there has to be a solution whwre I don't personally get to own a gun then I'm willing with how severe the problem has become to make changes.
  3. I still would prefer we just agree on restrictions that will help and not just ban and destroy all guns or ban private citizen's guns, but my point is that even if it came to that, I'd be okay with giving them up. If we as a society come to that decision and it can save lives, then fine, I'll give them up. I really just think we have gotten so out of hand that if it takes getting rid if them all then fine with me, I'll make whatever changes I need to in order to deal with it.
  4. Yes that's true. We split our time between a place in the country and in the city. In the country we struggle to keep the barn cats alive due to predators, but in the city we have more than we need. I still prefer them to rodents but constant cat poop can be a real issue too.
  5. I don't think anyone wants to do away with the bill of rights, just to acknowledge that it's okay to amend the constitution as we have always done as we have felt it was needed.
  6. I don't really understand articles like that. I guess what throws me is that there are bullies in lots of other countries too, but the countries with gun restrictions and different cultural beliefs about guns don't have mass school shootings, so why wouldn't we look to the variable of guns instead of the constant of bullying?
  7. Yes I would be okay with it. And yes I have had livestock killed by mountain lions. At the point we have reached with mass shootings and constant gun deaths, I feel okay with being restricted to a shotgun or no gun at all if it is for the greater good of our society as whole. I honestly am not desensitized to all these shootings, they are heart wrenching and I'm willing to make changes in my life if it helps to prevent them. I'm fine if laws make it so I can't own a gun at all and have to pay someone who is allowed to, to hunt the mountain lion for me or whatever the rules say I should do. Honestly, anything is better than all these kids dying.
  8. Yep it definitely makes it a more complicated issue. For me, amendments to the constitution in and of themselves show that it is meant to and can be amended as needed. We amend it as we learn and grow as a society just as we have always done with the I find it ironic when people want to fight so hard on a constitutional issue that was an amendment in the first place and argue that because the constitution says so, there can be no change or they are arguing that it's in the constitution so it can never change, yet it's an amendment and therefore a change and there have been lots of amendments as we as society have progressed. So yes, I totally agree that the constitutional issues make it more complicated for sure...but, if the constitution was meant to be set in stone forever and not ever amended as the world and our society changes and learns, then it's scary to think where we would be. Anyway, it just feels to me like we are still so far from change and too many kids are dying and people are suffering because our society is so divided. I own guns and if a law were created that could save lives and it made it where I didn't feel it was worth it to keep them anymore because of the remote possibility of being held responsible for another person's death, I would be fine with taking that risk or giving them up. I think there are other gun owners out there too who feel the same way but those of us who do are typically not the most vocal of the gun owners. I feel there should be a lot of restrictions including the types and number of guns private citizens can even own and honestly, if they banned all guns and philanthropists paid thousands for each gun turned in to be melted down and destroyed I'd actually be fine with that too. I'd be okay with only bear spray and my dogs and if mountain lions got to some of my cows then that would be okay to and I'd find another way to deal with it. I don't condemn people who disagree with me or think they are immoral, I think we all just have our own perspectives from our own lives and experiences and beliefs that guide our personal moral compass. I wish I could see in the future to know how this all turns out in a few hundred years.
  9. That's a good point, but I think for me personally, when rights compete with each other such as the right to life vs right to own guns, that's where additional factors such as morality etc come into play and I feel that personally if my right to own guns means I have to accept certain restrictions and risks or choose not to exercise that right, but those restrictions will help ensure the right of life to others which I feel comes above all other rights, especially for children, then I'm personally okay with that.
  10. Hugs...just keep moving forward minute by minute hour by hour. With a disabled teen and a toddler in the throws of the terrible twos...I can empathize. I just tell myself to just make it through the next 10 minutes, then just get through this next hour, and eventually I've survived another day...hang in there!! :)
  11. I think the way I view it in terms of liability, is that there are lots of things I can choose to own that increase my chances of a lawsuit so I weigh the pros and cons and decide if owning that thing is worth it or not. Although not a thing, my dog was pointed out to me as a liability by my insurance agent (she's a breed they restrict coverage for) and it made me think about the risks I accept by choosing to own her. Even if my yard is fenced but a kid in the neighborhood leaves my gate open and I don't realize, she could get out and knock someone down and hurt them and although I didn't do anything wrong and was responsible with her, my choice in owning her could lead to another person's injury and I could pay for it or at least have to defend myself. I think of it as a risk I'm willing to take by owning her. So if a law required I lock up my guns and store them a certain way or be held accountable, then it would just be a factor I would have to use in determining if the risk was worth it for me to own them, just like I do with my dog.
  12. It really is an odd letter. It seems that if there wasn't something else going on, that all she needed to do was send a note home with all the kids stating that they will be participating in X activities on a certain day and here are the clothing choices allowed per school policy for that day for the children who will want to participate. I mean why be so convoluted about it all?
  13. Well, in reality with how people are, I would expect to still have to go out and do my own clean up because these days I find it rare for people to step up and do what I think they should. But if I owned the tree I would go to your house and ask if I could go rake up your yard for you because that's how I personally would behave. So what I'm saying is that I would not leave any work for you if it were my tree, but what I would expect in reality if I were you, would be to have to go clean up my own yard because they probably wouldn't do a thorough job. I recently had to get a tire repaired after it was punctured from a nail from a neighbor's roofing project because they seemed to think the nails that landed in my yard were my responsibility to know about and clean up.
  14. What I think makes a lot of these conversations frustrating personally, is that I feel like it's viewed as an all or none thing. Someone suggests something that for instance, could save a lot of children's lives. Then people point out the flaws, as there will always be some, and give scenarios where some children will still be killed. So unless all gun related deaths or gun related deaths of kids are going to be prevented by a law, then it seems that the argument is to not do anything because there will be ways around it for some or it wouldn't work in some scenarios. But the way I personally view it is that if a building full of kids was on fire, I would want to save as many as I could instead of not trying to save any at all just because there might be some who are hiding somewhere and I miss them or there might be some in an area of the building I can't get to, or I might get hurt etc. My plan for going in that building may not be perfect and may not save all of the kids, but at least it could save some and some parents won't bury their kids that week. It just feels like with the gun issue, one side comes up with ideas to try to save some, and the other side says no that won't work because it won't save everyone, and since no idea will be perfect and save everyone then nothing gets done and we just stand and watch the kids being burned in the building arguing about why this plan or that plan isn't perfect. I guess I feel like there is this requirement put out there that if there are any scenarios in which a plan or law might not be perfect and prevent all tragedies, then it's better to not change anything at all. That's the part that feels frustrating to me. I just think that just because an idea can't help everyone, it doesn't mean it's not worth pursuing for the ones who it can help. Preventing some kids from accidentally or intentionally killing themselves or others is worth it to me even if we can't stop every single kid from accessing a gun, and even if it means that laws that affect my gun ownership change because even though I own guns, they are just objects, and I'd be willing to sacrifice them if it meant decreasing the number of kids dying from guns and the number of parents who have to bury their children. I don't believe that we should do nothing unless we can prevent every tragedy...preventing just some tragedies is still a good thing. Anyway, that's just my opinion and I don't intend it as an attack on anyone. I just think all or none is an approach that doesn't get us anywhere because no solution will be perfect and there will always be scenarios in which some tragedies will still occur.
  15. I actually like having cats in neighborhoods because they keep rodent populations down.
  • Create New...