You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Should firearms in National Parks be illegal ?
- Thread starter Hook686
- Start date
PTSD is a real and growing problem. I have worked with Vets from Korea Vietnam, Cold Warriors who fought across the world in places we never were, both Gulf Wars and Afganiastan.
Many of these guys and gals are ticking time bombs. Their recovery is predicated on loving, caring and disciplined support groups who are willing to go the extra mile and intervene when necessary.
The individual I am working closely with became suicidal. I organized a search team who found him and talked him down.
I removed his firearms. This was tricky and I was probably lucky when I did it.
I contacted his therapist at the VA. After much cannot confirm or discuse a patient, I flatly told her of the situation. At her next session he denied that he had a problem. The information I provided allowed her to interviene and he has started the healing process.
Now when I become involved with a Vetran I get an authorization to access his medical records and contact his Medical team. Some Therapist have included me in their treatment program.
My point is, if you are aware of a problem, you must go the extra mile to save these heros.
Many of these guys and gals are ticking time bombs. Their recovery is predicated on loving, caring and disciplined support groups who are willing to go the extra mile and intervene when necessary.
The individual I am working closely with became suicidal. I organized a search team who found him and talked him down.
I removed his firearms. This was tricky and I was probably lucky when I did it.
I contacted his therapist at the VA. After much cannot confirm or discuse a patient, I flatly told her of the situation. At her next session he denied that he had a problem. The information I provided allowed her to interviene and he has started the healing process.
Now when I become involved with a Vetran I get an authorization to access his medical records and contact his Medical team. Some Therapist have included me in their treatment program.
My point is, if you are aware of a problem, you must go the extra mile to save these heros.
Laws are only made for those that choose to abide by them. Doesn't matter if they're gun related or not.
Banning guns in National parks does no more than open up a playground for slime that will slither through the parks taking advantage of the good people that our gov't has made defenseless. Lawless don't care about laws.
Banning guns in National parks does no more than open up a playground for slime that will slither through the parks taking advantage of the good people that our gov't has made defenseless. Lawless don't care about laws.
I can't think of a single Law that includes a reward for obeying that Law.
The reward for obeying laws is living in a civil society. Doesn't sound like much, but it's a pretty big deal.
Most - if not all the time - thinking isn't part of the voting process...Our whole system has turned into a big voter built and endorsed disgrace where group feel rules our nations laws.
All of us are probably guilty of that in one way or another.
Speaking only for myself, when I see that a candidate is anti gun, I quit thiking about anything else about that person and feel their agenda is against what I believe.
Most- if not all the time - thinking is not part of the voting process...
Bit of a rant...
...Vetting a candidate , IMO, is something not done today by individual voters. Many rely on nothing but TV, radio, newspapers (media in general) to choose their candidates and never check into the candidates history of where they stood on different issue's.
Very sad to say, Ray Charles can see, that often times these media outlets are very biased towards a candidate. Many of our TV stations/newspapers do not even make an attempt to try to disguise the fact they are biased, have endorsed a candidate, and instead of doing their jobs of reporting fair, unbiased news towards all candidates they report biased, good news for their endorsed candidate and negative news against those they don't.
The political machine realizes the power of the media and the fact that individual voters are to lazy to properly vet candidates on their own. Therefore, during political campaigns, the public, through the media, gets pounded with non-stop, biased BS....then, these ill-informed voters go to the polls and pull the switch on a candidate they know nothing about except from what they learned from the biased media outlet.
Answer to this problem, shut our TV off during election year, get off our butts and properly vet the candidates before we choose one.
Don't vote a candidate on any level of gov't in office without knowing the candidates history on issue's important to us then gripe about laws the candidate tries to instill after in office.
RANT OVER.
IMO, laws are needed for a civil society. But, as history has proven, for every law made, there is a person out there that will break it. This is nothing new. If this wasn't the case, there would be no reason to own a gun for SD purposes.
As a citizen of the U.S. ,I should have the right to defend myself and family anywhere I travel within the U.S. boarder. INCLUDING National parks where as a US citizen, should have the right to come and go as I please.
With crime the way it is today, I'll not vote for any candidate with even hints of a history of trying to take that right from me.
BlueTrain, I think he means that individual responsibility is dwindling, and a combination of group-think and zero-defect is undermining our social fabric. And possibly that some people out there like to make rules just because they can, not because they actually achieve anything other than momentary publicity for a politician or party.
He might mean that statesmanship has been replaced by gamesmanship. (Both sides, or multiple sides if you count independents and fringe groups.)
He may also mean that anybody who thinks gun-free zones work is, frankly, an idiot.
And if that isn't what he means, it is exactly what I mean.
He might mean that statesmanship has been replaced by gamesmanship. (Both sides, or multiple sides if you count independents and fringe groups.)
He may also mean that anybody who thinks gun-free zones work is, frankly, an idiot.
And if that isn't what he means, it is exactly what I mean.
You must be kidding if you really think things have ever been any different. I agree that some things aren't what they ought to be, which I won't go into for lack of room, but group think is hardly a new concept. At one time you could vote a straight ticket on election day. And gun enthusiasts exhibit group-think just as much as anyone else. There is a host of buzz words seen all the time around here that also exhibits group-think.
Group thinking is not necessarily a bad thing, unless you don't feel like you're part of any group. However, we're probably more alike than either of us would ever admit.
Group thinking is not necessarily a bad thing, unless you don't feel like you're part of any group. However, we're probably more alike than either of us would ever admit.