pirana

Yes, that is what EVERYONE keeps saying. No exceptions. Everyone keeps saying that. Everywhere I go, everyone is saying that. Everyone. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

That depends on what you see the role of Health Care as. If you feel that Health Care should be actively involved with preventing health issues, then obesity is certainly a yard stick. If you believe that Health Care should only be about treatment after a problem arises, than obviously obesity has nothing to do with Health Care. Holy conjunction dysfuntion Batman. A good logician could feed a family of 4 for at least a week with this thread. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

A tough day, or just born mean? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Those both sound like ways to get more money. There was already a point brought up somewhere on here (can't find the post off hand) that if they want to verify license applications are filled out correctly, they could do a courtesy check on it without issuing a license number. Why not allow FAI licenses for USPA ratings? Call me lazy for not looking up the stats, but it seems there are more experts than newbies augering themselves in under a good canopy. Small data set, but of the 2 deaths and half-dozen femurs I've had the unfortunate experience to know, only one was a newbie. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Thank you. I have an appointment with a neurosurgeon today. Very similar experience. Had the same neck surgery very close to 10 years to the date following the rupture. Thought I knew what pain was until then. The few days between the last MRI and surgery I was eating a minimum of 200 mg of percodan daily just to keep from losing my mind. I obviously waited too long. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

It reads to me that he is saying that people who use drugs won't get caught. What am I missing? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Incompetent. IIRC, the intelligence was skimpy, sketchy, thin, unreliable, whatever. But Bush had a clear bias in what he was hoping to hear, so bought the weakest BS hook, line, and sinker. It's just so damn unfortunate that our electoral processes are no longer capable of providing us with intelligent, centrist, objective thinkers. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

You might be right, but I wouldn't bet on it. We will all know soon enough. "For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus," I Timothy 2:5 How soon? When do we get to know? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I think it kind of demonstrates the all around gullibility of most humans, how easy they are to manipulate, and how badly most look for someone to follow rather than take the lead. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

So if gay men are in a committed relationship and don't have sex they are heterosexual? You should be actively advocating for gay marriage then! We all know that marriage ends sex. Good point! I do not like the politically incorrect use of the term marriage for homosexuals. It is a religious term for the joining of a man and a woman. The joining of two gays cannot be a marriage. I'm OK with civil union. Since when did marriage become a religious term? Are you saying non-religious people aren't really married? Even if the state says they are? Is divorce also a religious term? How about alimony? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Interesting comment. How would a person know if they were a "true" homosexual or not? Is it just a matter of who a person is sexually attracted to? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Well said - totally agree. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

A post that gets to the core of the matter - everybody thinks they are the special ones. We need everybody to pony up - not more loopholes. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

No. Takes the exam online, in a controlled environment, kind of like the written portion of a DL exam. If no flags, purchase approved. If the results fall below a certain score on certain scales, then the results are referred to a shrink for follow-up, further review, and decision. Easy enough; and nobody has to discuss their poo-flinging. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

as of today - someone currently diagnosed as violent and criminally unstable will not get to buy a gun - I don't see how you plan to determine which people will get that diagnoses in the future vs those that won't. the "current process" allows people that have not yet demonstrated criminal instability to get guns you have not yet demonstrated criminal instability - nor have I - I am not inclined to restrict your freedoms in any way based on that. would you? how do you propose to take away a right to own property from someone that hasn't done anything wrong? though you sound reasonable on first glance, your comment is actually a bit distressing I'm assuming most people know what the MMPI is and how it works. It is an extremely reliable, nearly impossible to game exam that assesses mental health on several scales. I have no problem with it as a screening tool for gun ownership and can't see why anyone would object (unless they wanted to buy a gun and are afraid of not making the required level on whatever scale was to be used). So that would be my plan to determine who can own a gun and who can't. To be clear - I would not restrict people's freedom to own a gun without an assessment of their mental health. That's where the exam comes in. I do find it amusing that some people are OK with classes to train on how to properly operate weapons, but not an assessment to see if they are mentally stable enough to be trusted not to use it to act out their twisted notions. And this isn't just any piece of property. It's the most common tool for homicide in the world. Due to the secondary market (another problem the NRA refuses to help solve), they are very easy to procure. So, between lack of scrutiny and ease of access; we end up with a homicide rate that is outrageous compared to the rest of the developed world. Rate of homicide by firearms in the USA is: 10 times that of Austria or France 20 times that of Spain or Germany 50 times that of England or Singapore 100 times that of South Korea 200 times that of Japan The closest developed country is Slovakia - with only 2 times the firearms murder rate. And yet powerful interests are able to maintain the status quo - truly shameful - and especially shameful that it is done under the guise of liberty. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

The fact that the guy was unstable at the least, and very likely that he is psychotic. Such exams are very good at identifying abhorrent beliefs. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Hard to know. The background checks the military uses to grant top secret clearances might be overboard, but the ones used for buying weapons is clearly insufficient though. Somewhere between the two extremes is probably appropriate. Exactly my point when I keep using my Process Analyst mantra of the current processes being prefectly designed for the results being generated. The current process allows unstable people to acquire and use guns at will as long as they haven't killed anyone yet. IMO, that is not good enough - and based on the results we see - I would think most people would agree. At their core, I think most do agree; but they are more afraid of the paranoid predictions of the NRA lobby (today it's the unstable - tomorrow it will be you) than they are of the next unstable shooter. Anybody that thinks the current process works just fine is simply in denial. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I'm aware the NRA does not have the jurisdiction; but are you so naive as to be unaware of their power as a lobby in shaping (mostly preventing) legislation? My reference to intelligence was not to the unstable people attempting to buy firearms; but to those supporting the NRA in it's resistance to agreeing to legislation that would mandate meaningful screening. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I am certain a tool like the MMPI would work fine. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

OK, so clarification. The NRA is staunchly opposed to the level of screeening needed to keep loonies from buying guns. Yes, they will get flagged if they have a record. Not good enough (and they of course know that, but are afraid of what real screening would do to sales). Screening should not be a matter of "have you killed anyone yet" but more of "what's your state of mental health." So, I'll give you that the NRA is OK with very limited screening, but it stands that the NRA will not allow MEANINGFUL (preventive) screening. Loonies are buying guns. No way that is a lie. This guy is a case in point. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I would say any shrink worth their weight in salt could've easily identified serious problems with every mass shooting perpetrator I've ever seen or heard of. But of course identifying loonies before they are allowed to buy guns is not acceptable to the NRA. They'd rather just see the dead buried as quietly as possible and blame placed elsewhere if that is what it takes to preserve the status quo. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Specifically, which part of my post do you think is a lie? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Its so easy to say and yet virtually impossible to do. So to everyone but especially those in favour of some version of firearm control, what would you do to stop another mass murder like in Colorado. http://tinyurl.com/c4kd8pf Actually, quite easy to do based on evidence from other countries. The fact is that we, as a whole and largely thanks to the efforts of the NRA, have chosen not to take those steps. It is a matter of choice, and we have decided the results we are currently generating are more acceptable than having more restrictive controls. The answer is buried right there in the question - you stop mentally unbalanced people from mass shootings by passing regulations that make it difficult for them to get guns. It would not of course guarantee an end to such killings, but again; results from other places indicate a drastically reduced firearms fatality rate. As I told my daughter when they asked about the event; there are a lot of loonies out there, and the NRA won't allow screening to purchase a firearm, so this is the way it is. Lunatics can buy guns because a lot of people who aren't lunatics, but also aren't very smart, are afraid of who might not qualify for purchase. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

It's not the actual execution that is so expensive - it's all the legal wranglings leading up to it. The laws should be overhauled so that clear cut, caught red handed BS like this gets the proper treatment. There is no excuse to keep this person alive. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Doesn't really matter - they are going to lose. The smart person offered the spot would feign interest but find a plausible reason not to accept. Being the VP candidate on a hard right wing losing ticket that is this much out of touch with reality would be a very bad move. I've heard Pawlenty as a front runner - but he is a smart man and I say he declines if offered. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley