Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 03:10 AM Jan 2013

Clackamas Town Center victim's father weighs in on gun debate

Hmmm, let's see if some testimony from a parent of a gun violence victim is more equal than anothers...

...Ron Forsyth believes the gunman is the only person to blame in Steve Forsyth's death – that no law could have kept him safe.

"I believe all the rhetoric in Washington is just that, rhetoric," he said. "You can't really enforce legislation on rate of fire or size of clips or kind of ammunition because if you do, then the good guys won't be able to get it and the bad guys will have it."

He believes his son's legacy isn't about guns, but about all the people one man can touch during his lifetime.

"His celebration of life drew 2,500 people and they were all there for him," Ron Forsyth said.


http://www.kptv.com/story/20629031/clackamas-town-center-victims-father-weighs-in-on-gun-debate
18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Clackamas Town Center victim's father weighs in on gun debate (Original Post) friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 OP
maybe not, but stricter laws would still help in preventing some deaths JI7 Jan 2013 #1
*Some* stricter laws would help, most certainly... friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #3
The same principle applies to drunk driving laws. Decoy of Fenris Jan 2013 #5
people might be less likely to get a taxi, a friend who wont drink etc JI7 Jan 2013 #6
This guy lives in fantasy land Politicalboi Jan 2013 #2
Said by the person with a cannabis leaf as an avatar. friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #4
LOL... virginia mountainman Jan 2013 #8
DU'ers, before you reply to or kick *this* thread, here's some things you need to know*: apocalypsehow Jan 2013 #7
Then again... beevul Jan 2013 #10
Sure. Truer than ever. apocalypsehow Jan 2013 #11
The NRA would seem to have internal security that would impress Lavrenti Beria. friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #16
A week later, no reply. How unsurprising... friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #18
"Sensible gun control" in that post meaning "the gun control *I* want", naturally. friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #13
Good guys and bad guys Fumesucker Jan 2013 #9
Nice anecdote. TheCowsCameHome Jan 2013 #12
One with the same inherent value as any other anecdote. friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #14
What a way to dishonor his son. Typical Republican filth. nt Comrade_McKenzie Jan 2013 #15
And precisely who the fuck are you to decide whether his response is appropriate? friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #17

JI7

(89,240 posts)
1. maybe not, but stricter laws would still help in preventing some deaths
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 03:14 AM
Jan 2013

i wonder what he would say about the war on terror , should we not do anything since we can't prevent all of it. how about getting rid of drunk driving laws since people still do it .

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
3. *Some* stricter laws would help, most certainly...
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 03:19 AM
Jan 2013

Universal background checks, taking straw sales seriously.

The trouble with the "war on terror" is that the "cure" can be worse than the disease.

 

Decoy of Fenris

(1,954 posts)
5. The same principle applies to drunk driving laws.
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 03:25 AM
Jan 2013

Those who wouldn't normally drink and drive obey the law. Those who would -already- have a predilection towards drinking and driving will drink and drive anyways, regardless of law.

The same, by logical (and current statistical) extension, would apply to gun laws. Those who would already disobey firearms laws (80-ish% of homicides are with an illegally obtained/sold weapon) will continue to do so, while those who would obey the law are penalized further under additional laws.

JI7

(89,240 posts)
6. people might be less likely to get a taxi, a friend who wont drink etc
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 03:31 AM
Jan 2013

right now they can be arrested based on how much they drank even if they are driving ok. so that gives them more reason to avoid it even if they felt they could drive safely.

 

Politicalboi

(15,189 posts)
2. This guy lives in fantasy land
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 03:18 AM
Jan 2013

"You can't really enforce legislation on rate of fire or size of clips or kind of ammunition because if you do, then the good guys won't be able to get it and the bad guys will have it."

YES WE CAN!

apocalypsehow

(12,751 posts)
7. DU'ers, before you reply to or kick *this* thread, here's some things you need to know*:
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 03:44 AM
Jan 2013
"Thanks for posting this- I reposted it in GD

I realize that it will not go over well at all with some- but I have come to realize in my middle years
that the poor opinion of the ignorant is becoming less and less important to me**..."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=105686

"The Wars on Terror and (Some) Drugs have already been mentioned.

As for the rest, I tend to rely on something learned as a wee lad, and later in dealing with mid-level politics in the
real world: What you don't give them can rarely be used against you- a lesson many have yet to learn***...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=105690

FYI.

*All emphases added.

**That would be the opinions of the vast majority of DU'ers who are for sensible gun control.

***"Them" would be the vast majority of DU'ers, in their roles as alerters and jurors on community standards violations, particularly as it regards pro-NRA propaganda emitting from the Gungeon, plus the Admins for PPR; "many" would be the large number of long-term pro-NRA Gungeoneers who have recently been banned.

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
16. The NRA would seem to have internal security that would impress Lavrenti Beria.
Thu Jan 24, 2013, 12:50 AM
Jan 2013

I mean, considering all the shouting, handwaving, and dark mutterings from you lot about
"NRA shills/stooges" and "NRA talking points", you seem to be seriously lacking in, well,
hard evidence.

Where's the super-seekrit "Protocols of The Elders of The National Rifle Association"?
When presssed, you seem to develop either a sudden hearing loss or revert to Colonism:

Sergeant Colon had had a broad education. He’d been to the School of My Dad Always Said,
the College of It Stands to Reason, and was now a postgraduate student at the University of What Some Bloke In the Pub Told Me."

—?Terry Pratchett, Jingo



 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
13. "Sensible gun control" in that post meaning "the gun control *I* want", naturally.
Thu Jan 24, 2013, 12:35 AM
Jan 2013

As for the near-obsessive invocation of the name "NRA" in posts from people of your particular religious
persuasion, I don't take it amiss.

I realize that it is simply not possible for persons of your faith to accept that someone can support policies
that you do not without being some sort of NRA operative and/or member; we would sooner
see Pat Robertson attribute a disaster to natural causes instead of divine intervention....

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)
9. Good guys and bad guys
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 04:04 AM
Jan 2013

Last edited Wed Jan 23, 2013, 05:20 AM - Edit history (1)

Sounds like a nuanced view of things.

ETA: Link to the refutation of the "good guys and bad guys".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022244135

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
17. And precisely who the fuck are you to decide whether his response is appropriate?
Thu Jan 24, 2013, 01:08 AM
Jan 2013

For that matter, how do you know that he's a Republican- or that his son might not agree with him?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Clackamas Town Center vic...