It's a different world - Page 7

Mominohio · ‎08-08-2010

@DoneTryin wrote:
Yes, it certainly is a different world from what it was when I was a kid in the 50s.

Yes, it's frustrating to learn that some bad guys have slipped through law enforcement's fingers only to go on to perform heinous acts.

We want to retain our freedom which includes our right to privacy, & at the same time expect LE to be able to stop the bad guys before they commit the crimes. Where is the line to be drawn where LE has the right to check further into something a person does yet still allow us our right to privacy? I don't think there are any easy answers here.

@DoneTryin

You have summed it up perfectly. There are no EASY answers.

AngusandBuddhasMom · ‎03-10-2010

@Mominohio wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Mominohio wrote:
@qualitygal wrote:
@Pearlee wrote:
"It's a different world" is not news to me. We here in this country found that out on 9/11/01.
@Pearlee,
I think that we now, who may not have been in NY at that time, it's just really sinking in. You know how people can say, things happen to other people and they don't think it (bad stuff) will happen to them? I think reality has set in. The horridness of things that go on now, are unbelievable. I think it's just really sinking in about the reality of it all. It's horrible.

I don't think most people living in this country can/could grasp this sort of horrificness ever happening here. I sure didn't. It's so scary. JMHO.

Being the daughter of a very forward thinking LE career man, I always knew the possibilities, but I thought the American spirit would over come. I believed we had enough good people to hold most of the evil at bay. I am beginning to think we may not.
Seriously? We have evil within our borders. We have a Pres. candidate who is feeding off that hate and intolerance. It is those that refused to accept those who are different in this country that are the real problem.

And why in the world are assualt rifles legal to own???????????

Where did you see me define evil as only from outside our boarders? That assumption was yours. Evil from within has indeed always been with us, but we have fought and defeated (or contained or reduced) it over and over ( in areas like slavery, civil rights, gay rights, women's rights etc.)

We used to, even if slowly, break it down and work to change it. But it seems to be coming in bigger waves with more power than ever before, and I personally feel we have fewer and fewer people willing to fight for good.

No it is not coming in waves. There is certain media who incite fear and chaos. As for fighting for good define what you mean?

Do you need to be of a certain belief? Our military is still doing what it does as is our LE

goldensrbest · ‎03-10-2010

@Laura14 wrote:
@Maudelynn wrote:
@Melania wrote:
Sighing and moaning about the past does not help us NOW or those that supposedly saw the future and are glad they are dead. I would rather have them here instead of dead to save them from hurt. They would handle it like we do.
I think most us realize that things have changed for a long time now.
Many of you choose to overlook that the that person did nothing at the time that was arrestable. Just like one of you toting your weapons...unless you do something that is a crime you are free.

Do you want a police state? You want your rights preserved but then *itch and moan about nothing being done to protect us?? It's laughable at the hypocrisy and ultimate selfishness.
What really boggles my mind is the notion that we have to demand stepped up security when attending large gatherings, stepped up security which disallows guns from being carried into an event- in essence, we should be guaranteed a "gun-free zone" in gathering places.
However, you're treading on rights when you demand that the same "gun-free" zone be applicable to the public at large.

I don't understand that rationale.
I don't understand it for a different reason. Since most gun owners are incredibly responsible, I could not help but think how things could have been different if people had been allowed to carry inside. I get guns and alcohol are not a great mix but when the one and only can't get a clear shot, it would have been nice if there were a few others carrying to at least give everyone another fighting chance.

No, more guns in there would not had helped with this type of weapon he had.

When you lose some one you L~O~V~E, that Memory of them, becomes a TREASURE.

Maudelynn · ‎05-08-2015

@Laura14 wrote:
@Maudelynn wrote:
@Melania wrote:
Sighing and moaning about the past does not help us NOW or those that supposedly saw the future and are glad they are dead. I would rather have them here instead of dead to save them from hurt. They would handle it like we do.
I think most us realize that things have changed for a long time now.
Many of you choose to overlook that the that person did nothing at the time that was arrestable. Just like one of you toting your weapons...unless you do something that is a crime you are free.

Do you want a police state? You want your rights preserved but then *itch and moan about nothing being done to protect us?? It's laughable at the hypocrisy and ultimate selfishness.
What really boggles my mind is the notion that we have to demand stepped up security when attending large gatherings, stepped up security which disallows guns from being carried into an event- in essence, we should be guaranteed a "gun-free zone" in gathering places.
However, you're treading on rights when you demand that the same "gun-free" zone be applicable to the public at large.

I don't understand that rationale.
I don't understand it for a different reason. Since most gun owners are incredibly responsible, I could not help but think how things could have been different if people had been allowed to carry inside. I get guns and alcohol are not a great mix but when the one and only can't get a clear shot, it would have been nice if there were a few others carrying to at least give everyone another fighting chance.

Do you believe we should have stepped up security at airports and public gathering places? For example- the convention in Cleveland. Should attendees need to pass through metal detectors and such?

You have sacrificed nothing and no one.

AngusandBuddhasMom · ‎03-10-2010

@Mominohio wrote:
@Melania wrote:
Sighing and moaning about the past does not help us NOW or those that supposedly saw the future and are glad they are dead. I would rather have them here instead of dead to save them from hurt. They would handle it like we do.
I think most us realize that things have changed for a long time now.
Many of you choose to overlook that the that person did nothing at the time that was arrestable. Just like one of you toting your weapons...unless you do something that is a crime you are free.

Do you want a police state? You want your rights preserved but then *itch and moan about nothing being done to protect us?? It's laughable at the hypocrisy and ultimate selfishness.

Sorry but this post makes no sense to me. I truly don't get most of what you are trying to convey.

How does this not make sense?

klajfakj · ‎07-11-2010

As I was driving to work this morning, FM97 played a rendition of 'Over the Rainbow' in respect. I have never heard this rendition before and I found myself crying. I ask myself when is enough enough.

Laura14 · ‎06-09-2014

@Maudelynn wrote:
@Laura14 wrote:
@Maudelynn wrote:
@Melania wrote:
Sighing and moaning about the past does not help us NOW or those that supposedly saw the future and are glad they are dead. I would rather have them here instead of dead to save them from hurt. They would handle it like we do.
I think most us realize that things have changed for a long time now.
Many of you choose to overlook that the that person did nothing at the time that was arrestable. Just like one of you toting your weapons...unless you do something that is a crime you are free.

Do you want a police state? You want your rights preserved but then *itch and moan about nothing being done to protect us?? It's laughable at the hypocrisy and ultimate selfishness.
What really boggles my mind is the notion that we have to demand stepped up security when attending large gatherings, stepped up security which disallows guns from being carried into an event- in essence, we should be guaranteed a "gun-free zone" in gathering places.
However, you're treading on rights when you demand that the same "gun-free" zone be applicable to the public at large.

I don't understand that rationale.
I don't understand it for a different reason. Since most gun owners are incredibly responsible, I could not help but think how things could have been different if people had been allowed to carry inside. I get guns and alcohol are not a great mix but when the one and only can't get a clear shot, it would have been nice if there were a few others carrying to at least give everyone another fighting chance.
Do you believe we should have stepped up security at airports and public gathering places? For example- the convention in Cleveland. Should attendees need to pass through metal detectors and such?

Don't know how you could get any stricter than the airport. They already see me naked.

But as for metal detectors at large events, works for me! They were already in place at the inner city schools in Philly back in the day before all of this nonsense. I don't see why all of us can't walk through them. We do every day at the stores with the anti-theft devices.

151949 · ‎03-09-2010

You can spend your entire ife being paranoid every time you leave the house -- that is certainly ISIS's goal - to make us all fearful. OR you can put it in God's hands and go about living your life normally. Not having any tendency toward paranoia I will choose to do the latter. I believe the day we are going to die is predetermined by God in the instant we are concieved so I think be it a heart attack or a terrorist bullet - you will die that day and at that time, and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change that. Also, being a faithful Christian I have no fear of dying.

Mominohio · ‎08-08-2010

@Maudelynn wrote:
@Melania wrote:
Sighing and moaning about the past does not help us NOW or those that supposedly saw the future and are glad they are dead. I would rather have them here instead of dead to save them from hurt. They would handle it like we do.
I think most us realize that things have changed for a long time now.
Many of you choose to overlook that the that person did nothing at the time that was arrestable. Just like one of you toting your weapons...unless you do something that is a crime you are free.

Do you want a police state? You want your rights preserved but then *itch and moan about nothing being done to protect us?? It's laughable at the hypocrisy and ultimate selfishness.
What really boggles my mind is the notion that we have to demand stepped up security when attending large gatherings, stepped up security which disallows guns from being carried into an event- in essence, we should be guaranteed a "gun-free zone" in gathering places.
However, you're treading on rights when you demand that the same "gun-free" zone be applicable to the public at large.

I don't understand that rationale.

I don't know for sure who you are addressing in this post, but when I called for people to demand business to provide better security, I in no way said that was exclusively making places gun free zones.

There are many ways to provide/enhance security. All the electronic means, more armed security, control size of venue, control the structure/setup of venue, and for some venues, allow concealed carry.

Which ones any entitly chooses to use would be up to them, what their customers/participants make known they prefer, etc.

Events in the private sector have many choices at their disposal, including and up to allowing the participants to participate in their own security.

So you never saw a demand for a 'gun free' zone from me, for private or public application.

Mominohio · ‎08-08-2010

@ChynnaBlue wrote:
@Mominohio wrote:
@Puzzle Piece wrote:
For some things, probalby it's a different world - but then it's supposed to be.

I remember my history and well and so should everyone else. Many Native Americans were slaughtered and killed in the past just to take their land and just to kill them, yet it wasn't considered terrorism. 50 is a small number compared to the many that were killed in the past.

So this is a pay back kind of thing and to be considered acceptable?
That's absolutely not what she's said.

You painted a picture about living in a different world where fear and violence are somehow new. That's not the case. Violence isn't new. America has a long and shameful history of violence and a very short memory.

The post minimalized the deaths yesterday because they don't equal the numbers in other events in history. So there must have been some point being made.