Obama plans curbs on guns

[SuperLuigi]

The point is though that this sort of thing - that 3-5 minutes - hardly happens in other civilised countries. What is it about the United States that’s different? I refuse to believe it’s because Americans are just a lot more violent…

How long did it take the French police to stop the Paris massacre?

Americans may or not be more violent than other places, but one doesn’t need a gun to commit a crime.

 

[SuperLuigi]

=Sy Noe;13559783]You don’t know that one person’s life might not be saved or that a mass shooting in the future might not occur. So yes to me it is very much worth trying.

That’s the problem right there. Thinking that government can save every life or someone from hurt feelings.

 

[Sy_Noe]

It’s also not true. No one that I know of is being denied access to health care. I am not aware of a background check requirement in order to obtain health care. Even criminals who are denied access to arms are not denied access to health care.

In the U.S. There are all kinds of government funded programs that pay for health care services. I haven’t seen any that provide funding for people to exercise the second amendment right. Nor should there be, because government should not provide access to rights at the expense of others

Jon

Then you don’t know the same people that I do. I of course however consider healthcare to mean more than what one might receive in an ER after not being able to afford earlier care or who do not qualify for Medicaid in their states, in some cases because Republicans have refused to expand Medicaid, and who do not make enough to receive an Obamacare subsidy.

I will give you just a couple of truths for your knowledge base.

I know someone with terribly chronic pain. All sorts of back issues. Doesn’t qualify for Medicaid. Resides in a state whose statehouse is controlled by Republicans. But who also due to her health problems (back and severe headaches due to brain lesions) is not currently working and does not qualify for a government subsidy. Thank God she was approved for a medical trial which helped reduce her brain lesion. A lesion which previously she was advised was inoperable due to the risks of it being near her optic nerve. And thank God due to the trial, she recently has had her lesion now removed and for free. If not for that, there is no way she or her family could have afforded such a brain surgery. But her severe back problems remain. Yes she goes to a community clinic for treatment. The treatment costs her $65 a session. They would like to continue the treatments, even increase them to twice per wk. Although they are not yet helping and there is no guarantee they will. But that’s $130 a wk or about $500 a mo that she can’t afford right now. And in the end she might still need surgery on her back now which is out of the question financially.

Another person in a similar situation, also now caught inbetween not qualifying for Medicaid or a subsidy, has already paid out of pocket tens of thousands of dollars for 2 cataract surgeries and 2 retina surgeries over the yrs. Thank God the surgeries on one eye were successful. The person still doesn’t have a lens in their good eye. Couldn’t afford another surgery after all of the other surgeries so currently gets by wearing a contact lens as a substitute. But their other eye has had complications from the retina surgery. The buckle in that eye, which was used to hold the detached retina in place to prevent blindness, is now exposed and causes irritation to the eye and puss and a film to build up and their sight out of that eye is pretty much useless. Thank God though they have sight for distance out of one eye and for reading glasses from the Dollar Store.

Clearly all I can gather is we must live in 2 entirely different universes.

 

[JonNC]

Of course not.

Ditto.

I don’t disagree with you on how Constitutionally mandated rights work. I simply maintain that the right to own a gun is nothing more than a legal construct with no basis in Natural Law or Catholic Moral Doctrine.

First, those rights are not constitutionally mandated. They are constitutionally enumerated and protected. Their mandate is not from government. That was the basic premise of American governance, compared to the monarchical approach. The founders believed rights come from God (“endowed by their creator…”), and that government received power from the consent of the governed via the constitution. So it is government that is a legal construct, designed by the people, whose rights come from God.

The founders believed that those rights, enumerated in the Constitution, come from “their creator”.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=Leo2014;13562732]Please elaborate on these healthcare programs?
Aside from Medicare & Medicaid, there are no programs.

What other programs would you like me to mention? Medicare is supposed to be a premiums-based program (FICA stands for "contributions). But medicaid is there, as is CHIP. States also have various programs.

Please don’t mention Obamacare. Because as much as they like to claim it as providing “affordable” healthcare - it does not. Many recipients find themselves having such a high deductible that they are better off not having the coverage. Heaven forbid that your income for the year increases even by the smallest percentage - you will find yourself being taxed for the coverage you received!

Agreed. ACA is a fraud. Its intent was to fail, in order to prepare the people for a single payer authoritarian system.

The conclusion; no you are not denied “healthcare”, but if you cannot afford - your economic situation will close that door for you. With Americans, more unhealthy than ever, you would be surprise how many people come in the office needing care and willing to barter or beg for it. It really tests ones faith…

Its curious, if this is the case, how hard government, and it’s client groups like the ACLU, are working to undermine Church-based care, by attacking it’s principles and it’s policies. The goal, again, is top place healthcare in the hands of government only. The best chance for compassionate healthcare for those who cannot afford it is through charity, not government. We can see what government healthcare looks like when we look at the VA.

Sorry for being so callous, but what kind of neighborhood do you live in that you need to have a weapon present?

You’re not being callous.

You’re asking me to justify a right. I could ask you what type of neighborhood do you live in that you need a newspaper, or an opportunity to speak freely, or a lawyer if charged with a crime. We don’t need reasons or justifications to exercise rights.

Further, a safe neighborhood, or unsafe one, is not the primary reason given for the constitutional protection of the right, though it too is a good one. The second amendment says for the “security of a FREE state”. IOW, an armed citizenry is the final defense against tyranny, foreign or domestic.

Jon

 

[SuperLuigi]

What other programs would you like me to mention? Medicare is supposed to be a premiums-based program (FICA stands for "contributions). But medicaid is there, as is CHIP. States also have various programs.

Agreed. ACA is a fraud. Its intent was to fail, in order to prepare the people for a single payer authoritarian system.

Its curious, if this is the case, how hard government, and it’s client groups like the ACLU, are working to undermine Church-based care, by attacking it’s principles and it’s policies. The goal, again, is top place healthcare in the hands of government only. The best chance for compassionate healthcare for those who cannot afford it is through charity, not government. We can see what government healthcare looks like when we look at the VA.

You’re not being callous.

You’re asking me to justify a right. I could ask you what type of neighborhood do you live in that you need a newspaper, or an opportunity to speak freely, or a lawyer if charged with a crime. We don’t need reasons or justifications to exercise rights.

Further, a safe neighborhood, or unsafe one, is not the primary reason given for the constitutional protection of the right, though it too is a good one. The second amendment says for the “security of a FREE state”. IOW, an armed citizenry is the final defense against tyranny, foreign or domestic.

Jon

:clapping:

 

[JonNC]

=Sy Noe;13562845]Then you don’t know the same people that I do. I of course however consider healthcare to mean more than what one might receive in an ER after not being able to afford earlier care or who do not qualify for Medicaid in their states, in some cases because Republicans have refused to expand Medicaid, and who do not make enough to receive an Obamacare subsidy.

I think government has done more to limit healthcare because of programs such as Medicare and Medicaid because it has raised the cost of care, in a number of different ways.

I will give you just a couple of truths for your knowledge base.

I know someone with terribly chronic pain. All sorts of back issues. Doesn’t qualify for Medicaid. Resides in a state whose statehouse is controlled by Republicans. But who also due to her health problems (back and severe headaches due to brain lesions) is not currently working and does not qualify for a government subsidy. Thank God she was approved for a medical trial which helped reduce her brain lesion. A lesion which previously she was advised was inoperable due to the risks of it being near her optic nerve. And thank God due to the trial, she recently has had her lesion now removed and for free. If not for that, there is no way she or her family could have afforded such a brain surgery. But her severe back problems remain. Yes she goes to a community clinic for treatment. The treatment costs her $65 a session. They would like to continue the treatments, even increase them to twice per wk. Although they are not yet helping and there is no guarantee they will. But that’s $130 a wk or about $500 a mo that she can’t afford right now. And in the end she might still need surgery on her back now which is out of the question financially.

My sister has similar issues. I will pray for your acquaintance, and hope that government will get out of the way charitable groups who could do so much more than bureaucratic heavy government.

Another person in a similar situation, also now caught inbetween not qualifying for Medicaid or a subsidy, has already paid out of pocket tens of thousands of dollars for 2 cataract surgeries and 2 retina surgeries over the yrs. Thank God the surgeries on one eye were successful. The person still doesn’t have a lens in their good eye. Couldn’t afford another surgery after all of the other surgeries so currently gets by wearing a contact lens as a substitute. But their other eye has had complications from the retina surgery. The buckle in that eye, which was used to hold the detached retina in place to prevent blindness, is now exposed and causes irritation to the eye and puss and a film to build up and their sight out of that eye is pretty much useless. Thank God though they have sight for distance out of one eye and for reading glasses from the Dollar Store.

You’re assumption in both cases is that more government is the solution. I don’;t believe that to be the case. In fact, it’s clear that government is the problem.

Here’s a case for you:
My nephew served numerous tours in the desert over the last 10 years. He was hurt while on duty. Long story short, because the VA reduced his medications, then made it difficult to impossible for him to see VA doctors, he suffered a blood clot and died last summer. Please do not try to convince me that government health care is the solution. It wasn’t my nephew’s. It was his undoing.

Clearly all I can gather is we must live in 2 entirely different universes.

You’re right. I live in a universe where government causes more problems than it solves. You seem to live in one that wants more of that.

Jon

 

[LeafByNiggle]

First, those rights are not constitutionally mandated. They are constitutionally enumerated and protected. Their mandate is not from government. That was the basic premise of American governance, compared to the monarchical approach. The founders believed rights come from God (“endowed by their creator…”), and that government received power from the consent of the governed via the constitution. So it is government that is a legal construct, designed by the people, whose rights come from God.

The founders believed that those rights, enumerated in the Constitution, come from “their creator”.

Jon

Yes, the founders believed that. But maybe they were wrong. After all, they only represented one small country. Other founders of other countries came to different conclusions - some of them very Catholic. If the right to own a gun came from God, wouldn’t you need to support that claim with something more than the US founders?

 

[Leo2014]

First, those rights are not constitutionally mandated. They are constitutionally enumerated and protected. Their mandate is not from government. That was the basic premise of American governance, compared to the monarchical approach. The founders believed rights come from God (“endowed by their creator…”), and that government received power from the consent of the governed via the constitution. So it is government that is a legal construct, designed by the people, whose rights come from God.

The founders believed that those rights, enumerated in the Constitution, come from “their creator”.

Jon

And yet another quagmire…

The Constitution is being interrupted every day. Sadly, even the presence or association with a Creator is among those being challenged. However, our founding Fathers design the constitution to be Amendable. Yes, there are inalienable right defined within the document. However, history has shown that rights are subject to challenges and yes - change. An easy example to reference is slavery; the 13th amendment abolished slavery. Prior to the acceptance of this amendment, slavery was acceptable within society.

We make this argument regarding free speech. The classic; *but you can’t scream fire in a crowded theater *applies. Many of us want to see the 2nd amendment analyzed; how much arms does one person need and when do your rights invaded mine? With all the devastation that we have encountered in the last few years, the problem is only growing with concern.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Then you don’t know the same people that I do. I of course however consider healthcare to mean more than what one might receive in an ER after not being able to afford earlier care or who do not qualify for Medicaid in their states, in some cases because Republicans have refused to expand Medicaid, and who do not make enough to receive an Obamacare subsidy.

I will give you just a couple of truths for your knowledge base.

I know someone with terribly chronic pain. All sorts of back issues. Doesn’t qualify for Medicaid. Resides in a state whose statehouse is controlled by Republicans. But who also due to her health problems (back and severe headaches due to brain lesions) is not currently working and does not qualify for a government subsidy. Thank God she was approved for a medical trial which helped reduce her brain lesion. A lesion which previously she was advised was inoperable due to the risks of it being near her optic nerve. And thank God due to the trial, she recently has had her lesion now removed and for free. If not for that, there is no way she or her family could have afforded such a brain surgery. But her severe back problems remain. Yes she goes to a community clinic for treatment. The treatment costs her $65 a session. They would like to continue the treatments, even increase them to twice per wk. Although they are not yet helping and there is no guarantee they will. But that’s $130 a wk or about $500 a mo that she can’t afford right now. And in the end she might still need surgery on her back now which is out of the question financially.

Another person in a similar situation, also now caught inbetween not qualifying for Medicaid or a subsidy, has already paid out of pocket tens of thousands of dollars for 2 cataract surgeries and 2 retina surgeries over the yrs. Thank God the surgeries on one eye were successful. The person still doesn’t have a lens in their good eye. Couldn’t afford another surgery after all of the other surgeries so currently gets by wearing a contact lens as a substitute. But their other eye has had complications from the retina surgery. The buckle in that eye, which was used to hold the detached retina in place to prevent blindness, is now exposed and causes irritation to the eye and puss and a film to build up and their sight out of that eye is pretty much useless. Thank God though they have sight for distance out of one eye and for reading glasses from the Dollar Store.

Clearly all I can gather is we must live in 2 entirely different universes.

I live in your universe, Sy. I know plenty of people, some working people, who can’t afford health care. I know one man with a brain lesion who really needs surgery, but Medicare won’t cover enough of the cost. He doesn’t qualify for Medicaid because he does qualify for Medicare. He can’t afford supplemental insurance, yet he makes too much to qualify for a zero premium. And there are several families here at school who are not getting vision or dental care. Dental costs are exceptionally high, and personally, I consider dental health part of overall health. I recently had one small filling and it was $688! For a filling that was no bigger than a tiny dot! Crowns are $1,200-$2,000. My hairdresser needs an implant, and was quoted a price of $5,000. She ended up going to a dental school and paid $1,200, but many people do not have $1,200 lying around to spend on a dental implant.

I volunteer in a homeless shelter feeding the homeless when I can. None of them are getting medical care. A nurse practitioner comes to visit their little camp under a bridge to assess their situation from time-to-time. To have homeless and hungry people and people with no health care in a country with the resources of the US is disgraceful.

I hope your acquaintances will get the medical they need - mine, too.

 

[JonNC]

Yes, the founders believed that. But maybe they were wrong. After all, they only represented one small country. Other founders of other countries came to different conclusions - some of them very Catholic. If the right to own a gun came from God, wouldn’t you need to support that claim with something more than the US founders?

No. They were clearly and absolutely right.
Yes. The founders saw the results of supreme government power, sometimes carried out by people claiming the had divine right, Catholic and noncatholic We saw its results time after time in the last century. When the citizens are disarmed, tyranny follows. One doesn’t need to be a founder to see the results of a disarmed citizenry.
Self-defense is not forbidden Catholics or other Christians.

Jon

 

[LeafByNiggle]

No. They were clearly and absolutely right.

You are entitled to your opinion. But it is still just that.

Self-defense is not forbidden Catholics or other Christians.
Jon

Which is not the same thing as saying that restrictions on guns is forbidden by Christianity.

 

[JonNC]

You are entitled to your opinion. But it is still just that.

Which is not the same thing as saying that restrictions on guns is forbidden by Christianity.

And this is merely your opinion. The difference is that, in America, your opinion is contrary to that of the founders, and in response to them, the Constitution.
Progressives are not asking for restrictions. They are demanding disarming, just as their forebearers in Europe last century did

Jon

 

[ucfengr]

We make this argument regarding free speech. The classic; *but you can’t scream fire in a crowded theater *applies. Many of us want to see the 2nd amendment analyzed; how much arms does one person need and when do your rights invaded mine? With all the devastation that we have encountered in the last few years, the problem is only growing with concern.

It’s amazing how many people make this argument but have no idea what it refers to. The Schenck v. US decision where the quote comes from had nothing to do with fire or theaters. Schenck, the defendant in the case, was prosecuted for opposing the draft in World War 1. Oliver Wendell Holmes used the phrase “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic” as a metaphor to describe opposition to US participation in the war. Holmes abused the Constitution to criminalize legitimate political speech, just as many global warming alarmists want to criminalize climate change skepticism.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I think government has done more to limit healthcare because of programs such as Medicare and Medicaid because it has raised the cost of care, in a number of different ways.

My sister has similar issues. I will pray for your acquaintance, and hope that government will get out of the way charitable groups who could do so much more than bureaucratic heavy government.

You’re assumption in both cases is that more government is the solution. I don’;t believe that to be the case. In fact, it’s clear that government is the problem.

Here’s a case for you:
My nephew served numerous tours in the desert over the last 10 years. He was hurt while on duty. Long story short, because the VA reduced his medications, then made it difficult to impossible for him to see VA doctors, he suffered a blood clot and died last summer. Please do not try to convince me that government health care is the solution. It wasn’t my nephew’s. It was his undoing.

You’re right. I live in a universe where government causes more problems than it solves. You seem to live in one that wants more of that.

Jon

Actually I believe private individuals, our faith based groups and charitable groups have a role to play. I simply reject your premise that those sources alone could afford to cover the help that such a large populace today is in need of but can not afford. So yes I believe government has a role to play along with individuals and private groups and don’t simply believe that if only government would get out of the way, that magically all of our problems go away. I don’t claim to have all the answers. But I also don’t know if for instance the VA is properly funded or not. I know I am so very sorry to hear of your nephew’s death and it would be even more tragic if in a country as wealthy as ours, if lack of proper funding attributed to his death. And be assured that my prayers go out for your sister as well.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I live in your universe, Sy. I know plenty of people, some working people, who can’t afford health care. I know one man with a brain lesion who really needs surgery, but Medicare won’t cover enough of the cost. He doesn’t qualify for Medicaid because he does qualify for Medicare. He can’t afford supplemental insurance, yet he makes too much to qualify for a zero premium. And there are several families here at school who are not getting vision or dental care. Dental costs are exceptionally high, and personally, I consider dental health part of overall health. I recently had one small filling and it was $688! For a filling that was no bigger than a tiny dot! Crowns are $1,200-$2,000. My hairdresser needs an implant, and was quoted a price of $5,000. She ended up going to a dental school and paid $1,200, but many people do not have $1,200 lying around to spend on a dental implant.

I volunteer in a homeless shelter feeding the homeless when I can. None of them are getting medical care. A nurse practitioner comes to visit their little camp under a bridge to assess their situation from time-to-time. To have homeless and hungry people and people with no health care in a country with the resources of the US is disgraceful.

I hope your acquaintances will get the medical they need - mine, too.

Lily, this brought tears to my eyes. As I just said to Jon, I don’t have all the answers. And I am not so naive to think a perfect world can be achieved on this earth. But I know I think too it is disgraceful with the resources the US has, that we have the need that we do. But I think that might partly be why I can’t for the life of me understand such focus on stockpiling guns when there is so much more. Anyway, thank you and I hope and pray mine and yours do too. God bless you Lily.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Lily, this brought tears to my eyes. As I just said to Jon, I don’t have all the answers. And I am not so naive to think a perfect world can be achieved on this earth. But I know I think too it is disgraceful with the resources the US has, that we have the need that we do. But I think that might partly be why I can’t for the life of me understand such focus on stockpiling guns when there is so much more. Anyway, thank you and I hope and pray mine and yours do too. God bless you Lily.

I can’t understand it, either, Sy. I can’t understand the emphasis on stockpiling guns when so many go homeless, hungry, and without medical and dental care. If Sandy Hill didn’t change people, I don’t know what will. Those were beautiful little kids.

I feel ashamed to say I’m American at times, so I resort to just saying I’m French (I have citizenship in both countries) and let it go at that. I have to shake my head and ask “What’s wrong with people?” I know people who live under bridges in cardboard boxes in sub-zero weather and can’t get help because they don’t have a permanent address. Then I read about how much food the US throws out to keep prices high. When will this country with so many resources, get it’s priorities straight!

Thank you for your kind words. I will keep your friends in my prayers. God bless you, too, Sy.

 

[Sy_Noe]

And this is merely your opinion. The difference is that, in America, your opinion is contrary to that of the founders, and in response to them, the Constitution.
Progressives are not asking for restrictions. They are demanding disarming, just as their forebearers in Europe last century did

Jon

As a progressive, I do just have to ask when do you expect this disarming to occur? It hasn’t under President Obama in 7 yrs. So I’m not at all expecting it in the next yr. Under which Democratic or progressive President do you expect this to finally materialize? We’ve had many Democrats as President and no one has come door to door to confiscate your guns over all these years.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Since we have been discussing Obama and guns, just a programming note for those who might be interested and do not know. But tonight 8p to 10p ET on CNN, President Obama has a townhall on gun violence in America with Anderson Cooper. I realize some/many are not interested. But I’m just making it known. I’m just the messenger. No need to attack me or Obama or Anderson or CNN.

 

[Theo520]

As a progressive, I do just have to ask when do you expect this disarming to occur? It hasn’t under President Obama in 7 yrs. So I’m not at all expecting it in the next yr. Under which Democratic or progressive President do you expect this to finally materialize? We’ve had many Democrats as President and no one has come door to door to confiscate your guns over all these years.

Yes, one must be ever vigilant against alarmists taking advantage of the the latest crisis.