Black Tuesday
road angel
It's been a very bad day for those of us who live in Denver. The events at
Columbine High School won't soon be forgotten, and will surely scar the
community for years to come.
Light a candle. Say a prayer. Hug your children.
: road angel :
http://spot.colorado.edu/~smithsr
::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::
..it's a lonesome thing to be passing small towns
with the lights shining sideways when the night
is down, or going in strange places with a dog
noising before you and a dog noising behind, or
drawn to the cities where you'd hear a voice
kissing and talking deep love in every shadow
of the ditch, and you passing on with an empty,
hungry stomach failing from your heart.
-John Millington Synge
::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::
Cheshirehawk
wrote:
>Friends,
>
>It's been a very bad day for those of us who live in Denver. The events at
>Columbine High School won't soon be forgotten, and will surely scar the
>community for years to come.
>
>Light a candle. Say a prayer. Hug your children.
>
>
>: road angel :
>http://spot.colorado.edu/~smithsr
>
Our thoughts are with you. I cannot help but fear for my own
children, though we live in a different country, this sort of thing
happens, even in "quiet" communities.
>::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::
>
>..it's a lonesome thing to be passing small towns
>with the lights shining sideways when the night
>is down, or going in strange places with a dog
>noising before you and a dog noising behind, or
>drawn to the cities where you'd hear a voice
>kissing and talking deep love in every shadow
>of the ditch, and you passing on with an empty,
>hungry stomach failing from your heart.
>
> -John Millington Synge
>
>::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::
>
Blessed Be,
Cheshirehawk
(Remove dot in Cheshire.hawk to send email)
Dragonmama
and shooters. I've tried to imagine what it would feel like to find out
my own son was one with a gun in his paw, giggling while he murdered his
schoolmates. I could only conclude that if I even thought one of mine
was capable of that, I would have to kill him, myself, before he could
do such a heinous thing. I know myself well enough to know that if my
child were killed in a thing like this, the police would have to restrain
me. I thank the Gods my kids are all over 35! Just let my grandkids get
through school and college, intact, please Goddess!
Gods, what kind of world are we living in? I'm amazed at myself, even.
I have been weeping for the women and children and old folks of the
groups targeted by the Serbs, and now especially the Kosovars being
terrorized by both the Serbs and NATO (us). But I am weeping even harder
for Littleton, Colorado, this night.
Candles lit for Littleton and its grieving people.
Dragonmama
--
Ellen Mill
>Friends,
>It's been a very bad day for those of us who live in Denver. The events at
>Columbine High School won't soon be forgotten, and will surely scar the
>community for years to come.
>Light a candle. Say a prayer. Hug your children.
>: road angel :
>http://spot.colorado.edu/~smithsr
Oh, my friend... I've been shaken and saddened by your tragedy; this will
hurt your community deeply for a long time. Our recent (last year) high
school shooting pales in comparison, and the wounds still run deep. My
prayers are with you and your children.
Oak, near Springfield, Oregon
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> Gods, what kind of world are we living in? I'm amazed at myself, even.
> I have been weeping for the women and children and old folks of the
> groups targeted by the Serbs, and now especially the Kosovars being
> terrorized by both the Serbs and NATO (us). But I am weeping even harder
> for Littleton, Colorado, this night.
I live in Golden from second through fifth grades, and in Boulder from
ninth grade through college. The only time I've been so shaken was when
the idiot (whose name I've forgotten, though I'm sure he thought he'd be
remembered "forever") got up on top of the Texas Tower and started
shooting all and sundry the year after we moved from Austin.
As with everyone who has written, my thoughts and prayers are with all
the victims, including the parents of the shooters and the people of
Colorado who had no idea what they harbored amongst them....
I wouldn't have been nearly so shocked if it had happened in New York
City, or Chicago, or Los Angeles, or Miami - or even where I live now.
<snip>
Blessed be,
Baird
--
Modkin for soc.religion.paganism,
Modstaff for alt.religion.wicca.moderated
"We, the Person" <http://newstaffinc.com/person>
Dragonmama
morning. He is an hour away from Littleton, and tells me his family were
not directly affected. Praise all the Gods there are! \
However, I have not heard from the man who signs himslef "storm", an old
friend who is now living in Golden, CO. Anybody know Colorado geography
well enough to say haw far it might be from Littleton? I am concerned
about the possible effect on his kids. They are most dear to me. I know
the Storms are great parents, and must be coping well with this horror. I
am also worried about the effect of such news on storm's inlaws, both
elderly and not too well. Goddess protect and strengthen them all. SMIB.
After watching news reports on TV, and reading a lot of coverage in the
paper this morning, I am still weepy and stunned. I keep hearing a line
from an old protest song:
When will they ever learn?
Dragonmama
--
Shez
<drag...@netcom.com> writes
I agree Dragonmama, this is very sad, it reminds me to much of the tiny
Scottish town where a madman killed so many children and their teacher
What can have driven to teenage boys to do this, where did they get
these weapons, I don't understand how teenage boys could get their hands
on weapons like that. ?
I know some sick people have been putting up recipes for making bombs
on the Internet, and the ingredients are not difficult to get. so they
obviously planned this, and worked it out in advance,
I feel desperately sorry for the parents of the children who died, the
loss of a child is one of the saddest and most heavy burdens a parent
ever has to bear, just the thought of loosing my children or
grandchildren horrifies me.
But the family's of those two boys must be in turmoil to have lost
their children, and to know their children did this dreadful thing, they
will live with the regret and the guilt all their lives, wondering if
they should have seen this coming, should have done something about it,
it cant be easy for them either.
--
Shez sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk
The 'Old Craft' lady http://www.oldcity.demon.co.uk/shez/
Kate Orman
Dragonmama <drag...@netcom.com> wrote:
>I've tried to imagine what it would feel like to find out
>my own son was one with a gun in his paw, giggling while he murdered his
>schoolmates. I could only conclude that if I even thought one of mine
>was capable of that, I would have to kill him, myself, before he could
>do such a heinous thing.
I can understand the strong feelings that led to this thought. My own Dad
avoided a gun siege at his office by the sheer good luck of being away on
business that day. The images and stories coming out of Denver are
soul-shaking - that's the only word I can think of to describe the mixture
of bewilderment and pain. Coming on top of the horrors of the current
conflict in Europe, it's enough to shake your faith in human good, in your
own capacity for hope.
I can't say that, if I discovered that someone I loved was capable of such
a thing, murdering them wouldn't cross my mind. But I can say that,
instead of dealing with whatever problems they had, those children decided
to turn to violence. Rather than unpick the complexities of life, they
chose to wipe it out. Other peoples' lives; their own lives.
Dealing with depression as I am at the moment, I've had a glimpse of what
it's like to want to stop trying to cope, to solve, to deal, and to want
to just blot everything out. (At those times, I'm grateful for the Wiccan
view of reincarnation - I can't solve any problem by killing myself,
because I'll only be set the same problem in my next life. And the next,
and the next, until I *do* solve it.)
Life's bloody hard. There's a lot of pain, loneliness, and confusion out
there. And there's a lot of killing, a lot of problems being "solved" with
automatic weapons and missiles.
We've got to stop this cycle of violence. The cycle that says, you took my
land, I'll kill your children. You made me an outcast, I'll show you.
You're the bad guy, you're the problem - bang! You're dead! No more
problem!
If children grow up believing that no-one deserves to be killed, that
you've got to genuinely solve problems - however difficult - rather than
just reaching for the ordinance, we'll have part of the solution. Another
part of the solution will be reaching out to people long before anything
like this remotely crosses their minds.
Thanks for listening. My thoughts and prayers are with everyone affected
by this.
--
Kate Blum Orman <kor...@zip.com.au> http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au/~korman/
"I have no idea what that meant." - Dot Warner
Steve Storm
>friend who is now living in Golden, CO. Anybody know Colorado geography
>well enough to say haw far it might be from Littleton? I am concerned
>about the possible effect on his kids. They are most dear to me. I know
>the Storms are great parents, and must be coping well with this horror. I
>am also worried about the effect of such news on storm's inlaws, both
>elderly and not too well. Goddess protect and strengthen them all. SMIB.
I am here. Yes, we are even closer geographically than the Hampster. It
is the next county over, although it is the southern end of it. We have
no direct contact with the tragedy, although I have co-workers with
contacts there, none directly involved. It is unavoidable, all over the
media. It has been blasted into the conciousness of my children. They
are okay, although they do not understand. That's alright, I tell them,
it is not something that can be readily understoodeven by us supposedly
wise adults. However, it is my opinion that somewhere somehow some set
of adults failed those two children and allowed them to commit suicide in
horrificly destructive way. I have tried to impress on my children that
I don't want to be one of those adults. I am here to talk to, and if I
am part of whatever problem is going on, there are other folk to talk to,
and we went through a list.
The only other thing to do is hugs, shared fears, and shared tears. And
turning off the TV and radio when there has been enough tragedy blasted at
us.
>
>After watching news reports on TV, and reading a lot of coverage in the
>paper this morning, I am still weepy and stunned. I keep hearing a line
>from an old protest song:
>
>When will they ever learn?
That is a key question, and all my answers right now are devoid of hope.
I am afraid that all of this will get much worse before it ever gets
any better.
-storm
Leslie O. Segar
Kate Orman <kor...@zipper.zip.com.au> wrote in message
news:7fm7fn$ik3$1...@the-fly.zip.com.au...
>
> We've got to stop this cycle of violence. The cycle that says, you took my
> land, I'll kill your children.
Carl Sandburg told a great fable about that:
Dragonmama
: I am here. Yes, we are even closer geographically than the Hampster. It
: is the next county over, although it is the southern end of it. We have
: no direct contact with the tragedy, although I have co-workers with
: contacts there, none directly involved. It is unavoidable, all over the
: media. It has been blasted into the conciousness of my children. They
: are okay, although they do not understand. That's alright, I tell them,
: it is not something that can be readily understoodeven by us supposedly
: wise adults.
Glad to know the Squalls are getting lots of attention and parent help to
come to some sort of terms with this horror story. Good job, as usual,
you and your Lady are doing. My love and some extra hugs to all of you.
However, it is my opinion that somewhere somehow some set
: of adults failed those two children and allowed them to commit suicide in
: horrificly destructive way. I have tried to impress on my children that
: I don't want to be one of those adults. I am here to talk to, and if I
: am part of whatever problem is going on, there are other folk to talk to,
: and we went through a list.
I fear you are right about the adults who were not paying nearly enough
attention to those boys. I do feel for those parents, though. They are
going to have a lot of years to know that they raised kids who could do
this awful thing. Even if those boys both had brinn chemical imbalances
that helped push their violence, the parents, not to mention the teachers
and other adults in their lives, must have overlooked some pretty glaring
clues. The clothes, the attitudes, the fascination with weapons had to be
visible and disturbing to *somebody* old enough to seek help for them.
I know what it is to live with the fear that your child is capable of
terrible violence. I have a son who is bipolar. He is in his thirties.
When on meds, he is great. A good husband and father, a hard worker, and
a good man. Then, he decides that the meds have "cured" him and goes off
them. Wife and child abuse are the top of his list of violent doings, but
he has done crimes, too. Luckily, he has never had the weapons fixation,
so far. He has done time for robbery and assault, and his wife has taken
his two daughters and dissapeared, with which I heartily concur. I'd
rather not know those little girls than have them in danger from their
father.
If I had realized that brain chemical disorders run in both my own and his
father's families, I would have never married him, and I would not have
had children, at all. Unfortunately, young is dumb, and in the era when I
was a young wife, we did not know much about the disorders or the genetics
involved. So, we live with the awful knowledge now. We have produced
fatally flawed humans to continue the troubles.
Yes, I feel for the parents of those two boys. I cannot in good
conscience blame them, as I know they did the best they could.
Sorry to download my own stuff here, but I am thinking this through as I
write.
: The only other thing to do is hugs, shared fears, and shared tears. And
: turning off the TV and radio when there has been enough tragedy blasted at
: us.
You're right. Letting them know you are very much there for them is the
best way to go. Do tell them I am thinking of them, and hand out some
extra hugs in my name, OK?
My love to you, and your Lady. You are very special people.
As long as there are folks like you two, and kids like yours, there is
hope.
Dragonmama
--
Gale
> What can have driven to teenage boys to do this, where did they get
> these weapons, I don't understand how teenage boys could get their hands
> on weapons like that. ?
>
I don't know any way to explain to a Britisher just how easy it is to get
weapons in America, but --- hunting is popular: rifles and shotguns are easily
obtainable, generally legitimately used, and found in at least 50 percent of
non-urban American households; Americans also buy pistols to "defend their
homes" or persons -- again easy for any non-felon to legitimately purchase,
equally easy for any felon or child to illegitimately purchase; then there are
all the things no one in their right mind would desire --- all too easily
available for anyone comfortable with dealing with "questionable" persons (who
can readily supply such questionable items as semi-automatic or automatic
weapons).
I could begin a lecture about the difference between a hunting rifle and a
weapon of war, but that won't do any good at this point. I could also ask my
spouse for a psychological profile of these incidents (a real one differs from
the media portrait by a couple significant elements), but I doubt that would be
helpful either.
Let us just say that seriously disturbed young folks may harbor bleak and
horrific fantasies. Sometimes they attempt to enact their fantasies, and these
two had the means to turn theirs into a horribly real incident. I share in the
sorrow of all those who were more directly affected by the incident than I. And
I feel a bit of extra worry for the environment my 11 year old will face in a
few years, for such incidents can and do happen "anywhere."
--
Blessed Be,
Gale
http://www.capstonebeads.com/Magick.html (Tarot)
modstaff, alt.religion.wicca.moderated
shipping assistant: Capstone Jewelry Co. (we sell beads & semi-precious
stones)
http://www.capstonebeads.com
Doug O'Neal
> I am here. Yes, we are even closer geographically than the Hampster. It
> is the next county over, although it is the southern end of it. We have
> no direct contact with the tragedy, although I have co-workers with
> contacts there, none directly involved. It is unavoidable, all over the
> media. It has been blasted into the conciousness of my children. They
> are okay, although they do not understand. That's alright, I tell them,
> it is not something that can be readily understoodeven by us supposedly
> of adults failed those two children and allowed them to commit suicide in
> horrificly destructive way. I have tried to impress on my children that
> I don't want to be one of those adults. I am here to talk to, and if I
> am part of whatever problem is going on, there are other folk to talk to,
> and we went through a list.
Good for you. My thoughts are with all my friends and all the other folks
out in Colorado, where I lived for a year. I did get a note today from
Natalie, one of srp's other resident Coloradans.
Doug
"I know he'd be a poorer man if he never saw an eagle fly."
-- John Denver, Rocky Mountain High
Shez
<ga...@futuresouth.com> writes
>Shez wrote:
>
>> What can have driven to teenage boys to do this, where did they get
>> these weapons, I don't understand how teenage boys could get their hands
>> on weapons like that. ?
>>
>
>I don't know any way to explain to a Britisher just how easy it is to get
>weapons in America, but --- hunting is popular: rifles and shotguns are easily
>obtainable, generally legitimately used, and found in at least 50 percent of
>non-urban American households; Americans also buy pistols to "defend their
>homes" or persons -- again easy for any non-felon to legitimately purchase,
>equally easy for any felon or child to illegitimately purchase; then there are
>all the things no one in their right mind would desire --- all too easily
>available for anyone comfortable with dealing with "questionable" persons (who
>can readily supply such questionable items as semi-automatic or automatic
>weapons).
good security....?
Surely people don't keep guns and live ammunition around where their are
children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
and gave them status.
I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
or even anyone talking about guns.
>I could begin a lecture about the difference between a hunting rifle and a
>weapon of war, but that won't do any good at this point. I could also ask my
>spouse for a psychological profile of these incidents (a real one differs from
>the media portrait by a couple significant elements), but I doubt that would be
>helpful either.
I don't think the difference between one rifle or another matters really
they both kill.
I can well understand that a psychological profile would differ.
>
>Let us just say that seriously disturbed young folks may harbor bleak and
>horrific fantasies. Sometimes they attempt to enact their fantasies, and these
>two had the means to turn theirs into a horribly real incident. I share in the
>sorrow of all those who were more directly affected by the incident than I. And
>I feel a bit of extra worry for the environment my 11 year old will face in a
>few years, for such incidents can and do happen "anywhere."
Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
I do find it very strange, you have no idea how strange, the thought of
children carrying guns to school is horrifying,
I gather from one report on the news, that over a million children in
America take guns to School.
I noticed the headline on one of the newspapers, today, most of them
carried the news, but this one said, "God help America. " I think
everyone over here is shocked, we went through the horror of Dunblain
only a few years ago, but that was a very sick man, and the reaction to
ban guns, was something that was welcomed by the majority of people in
this country.
But banning guns is not something that will happen in America, its to
deeply entrenched, and your constitution guarantees that you can carry
guns,
I wish I could see a solution, but their isn't one, unless every child
is searched or goes through metal detectors and all schools have
security guards, which is also a horrifying idea.
People in England are very sad for all the parents and students
involved, we all hurt when children are killed like this, I hope this
never happens again in your country or mine.
>--
>Blessed Be,
>Gale
>
>http://www.capstonebeads.com/Magick.html (Tarot)
>modstaff, alt.religion.wicca.moderated
>shipping assistant: Capstone Jewelry Co. (we sell beads & semi-precious
>stones)
> http://www.capstonebeads.com
>
>
--
freesp...@my-dejanews.com
> Is their no laws that such weapons should be in a weapons locker, with
> good security....?
Depends on the state.
> Surely people don't keep guns and live ammunition around where their are
> children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
> Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
> and gave them status.
There are adults who think the same way. There are kids who think cars make
them big and give them status; there are those who think so about alcohol;
then there are those who do both. I think some people think so little of
themselves, that they use material things to boost their ego. It is sad.
I own a gun. I rarely carry it. Most recently when my car broke down in a
bad neighborhood on my way home from work (I get off at midnight). I keep it
in my trunk in a lock box. It is worth more than my car, so I took it with
me on my ten mile walk home. I was raised by a single woman. I was allowed
to hunt and target shoot without asking permission. I just went. I was
twelve. I didn't think I was big; most kids did this.
> I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
> when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
> or even anyone talking about guns.
I think you went to St. Louis, right? Missouri does not allow its citizenry
to carry guns without what it considers good reason (many states ignore the
Constitution, as many in our religion are aware). Here in Indiana I have to
undergo county, state, and FBI background checks. I don't have to have a
particular reason to apply though. If you have a DUI, felony, or misdemeanor
on domestic violence, you can't carry.
I'm sorry, this is off topic (rec.guns and talk.politics.guns is going over
this extensively). But despite the press and movie images, gun advocates are
not obsessed with guns; with many of us, it is a normal hobby.
> I don't think the difference between one rifle or another matters really
> they both kill.
Yes.
> Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
> will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
Yes, they have, are, and will increase.
> I wish I could see a solution, but their isn't one, unless every child
> is searched or goes through metal detectors and all schools have
> security guards, which is also a horrifying idea.
We do in Indianapolis. They have metal detectors that kids randomly have to
go through. They don't have security guards, the school corporation employs
its own police force. They have drug sniffing dogs too. Cameras also.
Random patdowns and locker searches. Until recently, if a youth were
suspended for any reason, they had to pass a drug test to get back in. One
school has banned profanity. They claim it works
> People in England are very sad for all the parents and students
> involved, we all hurt when children are killed like this, I hope this
> never happens again in your country or mine.
I hope so too. I am afraid though. The day this happened a student here was
arrested for having a gun at school. Last year a first grader was! I don't
no, maybe gun control is a way. I doubt it though. When horrible things
happen, we look for causes, then ban the hell out of them (whether they were
the real and only causes or not). I hear they are blaming Marilyn Manson and
the Goth movement; in Denver they cancelled his April 30th show. Yes guns can
do more than knives, but remember what Jim Jones (another fine Hoosier) did
with some kool-aid and stricnine?
Blessed be,
Frank
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Lee Ann
wrote:
>Is their no laws that such weapons should be in a weapons locker, with
>good security....?
>children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
>Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
>and gave them status.
>when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
>or even anyone talking about guns.
Different areas in the US have different laws about guns, but, by and
large, access and use are pretty unregulated. Every time someone tries
to pass any sort of gun control measure, some Americans start pointing
at the Second Amendment to our Constitution. ("A well regulated
Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of
the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.)
Some people argue that that means Americans should be able to own and
use whatever guns they like; I, and others, disagree. But for now, it
means that there are minimal restrictions on what kinds of "Arms"
Americans have access to.
A lot of people are stupid. They keep loaded guns around kids. They
don't lock their guns and ammo separately. There are stories every
year about how some little kid gets ahold of a loaded gun, and shoots
a little friend while they're playing. But we still don't want gun
laws (as a nation; personally, I'd like to see a lot more gun
control).
As a side note: The National Rifle Association (NRA), possible the
largest single opponent to any gun control legislation, is having its
national convention in Colorado this week. Despite the tragedy, they
refuse to cancel (despite calls to do so from numerous public
figures). To give them a little credit, they did cancel a gun show
that was supposed to be part of the "festivities".
>Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
>will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
They've been tightening up, but there's a limit to what you can do.
Unless they are willing to turn our schools into little prisons,
complete with individual, daily searches and locked doors, there will
always be a way for kids to get a gun into a school, if they really
want to.
>I do find it very strange, you have no idea how strange, the thought of
>children carrying guns to school is horrifying,
> I gather from one report on the news, that over a million children in
>America take guns to School.
It is horrifying. What's more horrifying is the lack of parenting
going on in many (not all, to be sure) of these cases.
>I noticed the headline on one of the newspapers, today, most of them
>carried the news, but this one said, "God help America. " I think
>everyone over here is shocked, we went through the horror of Dunblain
>only a few years ago, but that was a very sick man, and the reaction to
>ban guns, was something that was welcomed by the majority of people in
>this country.
>But banning guns is not something that will happen in America, its to
>deeply entrenched, and your constitution guarantees that you can carry
>guns,
>I wish I could see a solution, but their isn't one, unless every child
>is searched or goes through metal detectors and all schools have
>security guards, which is also a horrifying idea.
Exactly. Since we will not control guns in this country, incidents
like this are bound to happen in one setting or another. You'd be
pretty shocked at the murder rates for even one of our large cities,
too. :-(
>People in England are very sad for all the parents and students
>involved, we all hurt when children are killed like this, I hope this
>never happens again in your country or mine.
I think we all hope that. But, unfortunately, I don't think that hope
will be enough, by itself.
Blessings,
Lee Ann
Lauren Foster-MacLeod
> On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:50:17 CST, Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>
> wrote:
>>Is their no laws that such weapons should be in a weapons locker, with
>>good security....?
>>Surely people don't keep guns and live ammunition around where their are
>>children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
>>Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
>>and gave them status.
>>I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
>>when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
>>or even anyone talking about guns.
>
> Different areas in the US have different laws about guns, but, by and
> large, access and use are pretty unregulated. Every time someone tries
> to pass any sort of gun control measure, some Americans start pointing
> at the Second Amendment to our Constitution. ("A well regulated
> Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of
> the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.)
As a Canadian, who has grown up north of the US border, and as a parent -
I have a 15 year old son - I share your sadness. Like Shez, I have
witnessed this incident from another country, but in canada we are all too
aware of this sort of thing. Our gun lawas are different from those in
the states. A new law that was greatly contested by hunters, but did pass
in parliament, was that every gun in Canada has to be registered.
I have kept my son abreast of the tragedy at Columbine High, and discussed
the 'how could this happen',etc. I also realize that this sort of thing
CAN happen anywhere. Just a week and a half ago, an ex-employee of our
city bus company went into the main bud garage and shot dead 4 of his
former workmates, then killed himslef. Twenty years ago a teenager in our
city (Ottawa) went into his highschool and gunned down a number of
students and killed himself. A recent in-depth follow-up article in "The
Ottwa Citizen" newspaper interviewed some of the former students who were
directly affected (injured). It has affected their lives, and in their
40's now, some haven't really recovered from it. It's scarey.
Unfortunatlely, it's no surprise to me. The TV shows, movies, video and
computer games that our children have access to, and that we permit them
to have are way different from what we had at their age. The behavior
continuum has shifted, as if parents are often afraid to set limits for
kids to follow. I wonder how these kids will raise their own children;
will they become more permissive, or do a turn-around?
I talk with my kids, listen to them, and do my best to be aware of what
they are doing, while still showing respect. My husband and I do our best to
set good examples.But I also realize that with incidents such as the one
in Colorado, as well as what lies ahead in our own futures, it can also be
bad luck - being at the wrong place at the wrong time.
Also - did anyone (in this thread) mention the bill they want to pass in
Colorado, making it leagal to carry concealed weapons?
- Laurie F-M
--
Yesterday is history
Tomorrow is a mystery
Today is a gift
That's why they call it "The Present".
William Hughes
Ann) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:50:17 CST, Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>Is their no laws that such weapons should be in a weapons locker, with
>>good security....?
>>Surely people don't keep guns and live ammunition around where their are
>>children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
>>Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
>>and gave them status.
>>I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
>>when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
>>or even anyone talking about guns.
>
>Different areas in the US have different laws about guns, but, by and
>large, access and use are pretty unregulated.
Ahem. There are over 27,000 gun control laws on the books in the United States.
> Every time someone tries
>to pass any sort of gun control measure, some Americans start pointing
>at the Second Amendment to our Constitution. ("A well regulated
>Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of
>the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.)
>
>Some people argue that that means Americans should be able to own and
>use whatever guns they like; I, and others, disagree. But for now, it
>means that there are minimal restrictions on what kinds of "Arms"
>Americans have access to.
27,000 laws are hardly "minimal restrictions". In any case, the two criminals
who caused this tragedy had a history of threatening other students, and broke
about a dozen Federal and state laws to commit their crimes.
>A lot of people are stupid. They keep loaded guns around kids. They
>don't lock their guns and ammo separately. There are stories every
>year about how some little kid gets ahold of a loaded gun, and shoots
>a little friend while they're playing. But we still don't want gun
>laws (as a nation; personally, I'd like to see a lot more gun
>control).
Exactly what would you like to see? Be specific.
>As a side note: The National Rifle Association (NRA), possible the
>largest single opponent to any gun control legislation, is having its
>national convention in Colorado this week. Despite the tragedy, they
>refuse to cancel (despite calls to do so from numerous public
>figures). To give them a little credit, they did cancel a gun show
>that was supposed to be part of the "festivities".
The National Rifle Association has cancelled _all_ activities except the
required annual member's meeting. This meeting is required by the laws under
which the NRA is incorporated. Also, it is rather difficult to cancel an event
of the size of the annual NRA convention.
>>Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
>>will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
>
>They've been tightening up, but there's a limit to what you can do.
>Unless they are willing to turn our schools into little prisons,
>complete with individual, daily searches and locked doors, there will
>always be a way for kids to get a gun into a school, if they really
>want to.
Even prisons, which are totally controlled, have problems with weapons and
drugs.
>>I do find it very strange, you have no idea how strange, the thought of
>>children carrying guns to school is horrifying,
>> I gather from one report on the news, that over a million children in
>>America take guns to School.
>
>It is horrifying. What's more horrifying is the lack of parenting
>going on in many (not all, to be sure) of these cases.
That's part of the problem. Another part is the refusal by many to hold
individuals responsible for their own actions -- it's always the fault of
someone or something else. People are already blaming heavy metal music, violent
movies, etc. for the Littleton tragedy -- everything except the two criminals.
>>I noticed the headline on one of the newspapers, today, most of them
>>carried the news, but this one said, "God help America. " I think
>>everyone over here is shocked, we went through the horror of Dunblain
>>only a few years ago, but that was a very sick man, and the reaction to
>>ban guns, was something that was welcomed by the majority of people in
>>this country.
>>But banning guns is not something that will happen in America, its to
>>deeply entrenched, and your constitution guarantees that you can carry
>>guns,
>>I wish I could see a solution, but their isn't one, unless every child
>>is searched or goes through metal detectors and all schools have
>>security guards, which is also a horrifying idea.
>
>Exactly. Since we will not control guns in this country, incidents
>like this are bound to happen in one setting or another. You'd be
>pretty shocked at the murder rates for even one of our large cities,
>too. :-(
However, this is not due to any failure of gun control. America is a very
violent nation -- our non-gun murder and assault rates are also higher than
almost everywhere else.
>>People in England are very sad for all the parents and students
>>involved, we all hurt when children are killed like this, I hope this
>>never happens again in your country or mine.
>
>I think we all hope that. But, unfortunately, I don't think that hope
>will be enough, by itself.
>
>Blessings,
>
>Lee Ann
For the record, I am a non-gun-owning member of the NRA and a long-time advocate
of the proper and safe ownership of personal weapons.
If anyone wants to continue this discussion, I suggest moving it to email or
over to talk.politics.guns.
Neo-Taoist-Techno-Pagan -- All hail the holy motherboard!
(Delete underscores in address before replying)
======================================= MODERATOR'S COMMENT:
I would second the suggestion at the bottom of this article. -Baird
virtuo...@hotmail.com
Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >I don't know any way to explain to a Britisher just how easy it is to get
> >weapons in America, but --- hunting is popular: rifles and shotguns are
easily
> >obtainable, generally legitimately used, and found in at least 50 percent of
> >non-urban American households; Americans also buy pistols to "defend their
> >homes" or persons -- again easy for any non-felon to legitimately purchase,
> >equally easy for any felon or child to illegitimately purchase; then there
are
> >all the things no one in their right mind would desire --- all too easily
> >available for anyone comfortable with dealing with "questionable" persons
(who
> >can readily supply such questionable items as semi-automatic or automatic
> >weapons).
> Is their no laws that such weapons should be in a weapons locker, with
> good security....?
Well, in a word, NO.
there are now a few states where owners of guns can be held criminally
liable if their guns are used by minors. California has such a law.
An exb-friend of miine was a member of the sfpd swat team.
He kept his guns securely locked in a safe, and he lived alone.
If you know what guns can do, you keep 'em secured.
But the case is, where I grew up, we had lots of hunters, and
access to the sorts of weapons they used was easy.
I dunno, I was a high school reject, but I never thought to take
a gun to school and shoot those poor mopes! I mean, you could tell
even then that the popular kidz had all peaked, and their lives
became sorry slides down slopes of disillusionment and conformity.
I bugged out ASAP. Never looked back.
> Surely people don't keep guns and live ammunition around where their are
> children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
Oh, yeah, well, we all did. My dad was not a hunter, but he
did the take-the-sons-hunting bit, because that's what you did
in those days, but my bros didn't like hunting, so the guns just
sat in the basement. the thought of using them didn't occur to me,
or any of my anti-clique pals.
> Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
> and gave them status.
Yeah, well, all the Rambo type movies, of the loner being wronged,
using a gun, killing all the meanies and being a hero is a new
archetype. But, it's like all movies, ain't like that in real life.
Hookers don't look like Kim Basinger, either.
I always thought of using guns in terms of yelling, screaming, the
smell of blood, shit and piss . .. don't know where I got that
from, maybe a past life or something. but the movies make killing
look easy. And using a gun is easy. Not as easy as bombing, mind you,
because with a gun you at least have to look at your target most of the
time.
> I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
> when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
> or even anyone talking about guns.
I met a britcop once, at the sfpd firing range.
He was a bit nonplussed at all the guns everywhere.
He didn't want to carry one himself.
Don't blame him.
> >
> >I could begin a lecture about the difference between a hunting rifle and a
> >weapon of war, but that won't do any good at this point.
*ahem*
the weapons they used were NOT "weapons of war" and ARE used
in hunting.
> I could also ask my
> >spouse for a psychological profile of these incidents (a real one differs
from
> >the media portrait by a couple significant elements), but I doubt that would
be
> >helpful either.
20/20 hindsight at best.
> I don't think the difference between one rifle or another matters really
> they both kill.
But some are easier to use, can spray more lead, etc.
Note that these weapons were not automatic, just one bullet
at a time. They used sawed-off shotguns, which at close
range is a very devastating weapon, and useful only against an
unarmed target, because you need to get close. When you cut
the barrel off, the muzzle velocity is lessened, and the spray
pattern of the shot spread out, so you sacrifice accuracy and range.
> I can well understand that a psychological profile would differ.
After studying some forensic psych, I'd say each criminal has
a unique profile, like fingerprints, and since we have no way
of verifying or corroborating anything, it's not all that useful.
You get some MAJOR attribution error.
snip
> I do find it very strange, you have no idea how strange, the thought of
> children carrying guns to school is horrifying,
> I gather from one report on the news, that over a million children in
> America take guns to School.
"yeahbut" most of those kids are poor minority kids, and so america
don't really care, after all, you can't expect "those people" to
know how to behave. Just look at the stats on criminal violence/death
for poor/minority kids, compared to white punks from the 'burbs, but
those lives are not as meritorious, or so it would seem.
> I noticed the headline on one of the newspapers, today, most of them
> carried the news, but this one said, "God help America. " I think
> everyone over here is shocked, we went through the horror of Dunblain
> only a few years ago, but that was a very sick man, and the reaction to
> ban guns, was something that was welcomed by the majority of people in
> this country.
> But banning guns is not something that will happen in America, its to
> deeply entrenched, and your constitution guarantees that you can carry
> guns,
Uh, not exactly, but never mind.
> I wish I could see a solution, but their isn't one, unless every child
> is searched or goes through metal detectors and all schools have
> security guards, which is also a horrifying idea.
Doesn't work.
> People in England are very sad for all the parents and students
> involved, we all hurt when children are killed like this, I hope this
> never happens again in your country or mine.
It will.
It's not that new a thing.
What is different is the media pumping up these stories.
Hell, back in the 1800s, there was this thing called "cabin fever"
people would whack out, kill everyone, and the bodies wouldn't be
found until the spring thaw. Shit happens.
But what I DON'T understand is why the parents of the shooters didn't
do something about their kids when it was obvious they were over the
points, and if *I* had tried to build bombs in our garage, Mom would
have killed me herself.
AND if only those assholeadministrators would stop jockitches
from tormenting outsiders, don't give me that "boys will be boys"
bullshit for their raping girls and gaybashing that they do.
I mean, face it, this was an extroverted suicide, they wanted to die
and take everyone with them. Maybe if the popular kids hadn't been
such assholes . .. .
If you kick a dog long enough, you can get even a Labrador
to bite.
Susan Profit
haven't explored their shadow selves. EVERYONE, under certain conditions
is capable of killing people, and if you look at event like Littleton or
Springfield or other such events and do not understand that the
perpetrators are more like you than you are willing to admit, you will
never understand major parts of your motivations, and that can and will
affect your energy workings.
In article <Dmpc0dAY...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>,
Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> What can have driven to teenage boys to do this?
I do not know in this specific case. However, it is not uncommon for some
people when faced with despair to commit suicide. There have historically
been many people who, when faced with overwhelming odds in battle or in
life, decided to take as many of those who would make life difficult for
their survivors or who have been in opposition to them with them.
The Hungarians honor those who, when faced with the certain fall of
specific fortress lovingly killed their wives and children to spare them
the rapes and tortures that were inevitably the fate of Turkinsh captives
at the time, and at then dawn bravely swarmed out of the fortress to take
as many Turks with them as they could before they were all massacred. Many
other European nations have traditions of 'take as many with you as you
can before you die' when faced with certain defeat as well - and
Berserkers were a variation on that theme that didn't need there to be
overwhelming odds to go into battle in this state. Japan has long had a
tradition of soldiers and those related to soldiers who willingly
sacrificed themselves to save or try to save others, trying to destroy
their enemies in the process. Cultures that glorify such things have to
accept that there are minds that will twist them to personal revenge.
There are some few murder/suicides that when investigated come down to the
supposed 'healthy' partner either discovering they are faced with death
from a terminal illness themselves or from suicidal depression taking the
life of a child/parent/spouse who will be unable to care for themselves
after their suicide. Far more common is the suicide who takes revenge on
the partner who has driven them (in their own minds) to the suicide. This
is a pattern that is particularly dangerous to battered women who try to
leave some partners, but it can also be the motivation for the ex-employee
who goes after their former co-workers and supervisors or the killer who
goes after a supposed oppressor group and kills themselves when they are
trapped. This is nothing more than an extension of the behavior that was
thought honorable in battle, but is no longer considered acceptable on a
personal level modernly.
There is nothing new in human behavior in such patterns. And when cultures
have tales and legends of such behavior being honorable, there is little
incentive for some people to stop and realize they are using them as
justification for no longer acceptable forms of behavior.
Is this what happened in Colorado? How would I know? But I am NOT surprised
when someone who considers themselves to be despairing enough to commit
suicide decides to take someone or many someones with them because it is
all too human a behavior pattern historically.
@}->- ;) Tinne :D Laughter Heals :) -<-{@
silveroak
Lauren Foster-MacLeod wrote in message
<7fpsv1$m...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>...
>Lee Ann (g...@infinet.com) writes:
>> On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:50:17 CST, Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>>good security....?
>>>children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
>>>and gave them status.
>>>when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
>>>or even anyone talking about guns.
>>
>> to pass any sort of gun control measure, some Americans start pointing
>> at the Second Amendment to our Constitution. ("A well regulated
>> Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of
>> the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.)
>
Ironically, nobody seems to protest registration laws. A large part of
that comes from the feeling (largely justified in a historical context) that
the framers of the constitution sought to ensure the liberty of the common
man by enabling every decent citizen to own their own weaponry, which could
then be turned against the government if it got out of control. If this were
followed through, whether the weapons were registered or not would have very
little impact on a revolutionary force, while being very useful in tracking
down killers and criminals.
Once we got into the nuclear age, however, it began to be recognized
that not every citizen should be allowed to have any weapon, and the
classifications of what is permitted to be owned have shrike annually since
then (I think it was back in the 60's or 70's they outlawed personal mortars
and artillery cannons.)
silveroak
William Hughes <_lsc2...@flash.net> wrote in message
<37206df4...@mail.flash.net>...
>That's part of the problem. Another part is the refusal by many to hold
>individuals responsible for their own actions -- it's always the fault of
>someone or something else. People are already blaming heavy metal music,
violent
>movies, etc. for the Littleton tragedy -- everything except the two
criminals.
>
From recent information it looks like there were more than two- I have
heard a 20 lb. bomb was found that the two gunmen could not have gotten to
its final location unassisted (especially not while planting the other 30
some odd bombs, some in other people's lockers!)
As for gun control laws, if you outlaw guns, someone will build a
semi-automatic crossbow. Heck, I've already got the designs worked up...
Gale
> As for gun control laws, if you outlaw guns, someone will build a
> semi-automatic crossbow. Heck, I've already got the designs worked up...
In our community, a year or so ago, a pair of young men managed to perpetrate
a random murder by staging a drag race down a suburban feeder street --- into
the face of after work (5:30pm) traffic. I find the parallels between that
stunt and the various school shootings significant --- though their weapon of
choice was a late-model pickup truck.
I'm inclined to be a strong proponent of gun control, but I'm not going to
claim gun control or anything else will "cure" the American propensity to
violence. There are no easy answers.
freesp...@my-dejanews.com
Gale <ga...@futuresouth.com> wrote:
> In our community, a year or so ago, a pair of young men managed to perpetrate
> a random murder by staging a drag race down a suburban feeder street --- into
> the face of after work (5:30pm) traffic. I find the parallels between that
> stunt and the various school shootings significant --- though their weapon of
> choice was a late-model pickup truck.
Blame is being put everywhere, I've seen - the internet, Marilyn Manson,
Goths (which of course is propagated by satanic pagans), Lack of God, God,
guns, gun- owners, tvs, movies, video games. I guess people want to find ONE
easy fall guy, then blanket it out.
> I'm inclined to be a strong proponent of gun control
Why? What gun control would that be? These youths were breaking existing gun
control laws, as was whoever gave them the access. I guess all we can do is
to completely ban all firearms, that way they wouldn't have been able to get
any at all. In the mean time, I'll be on the corner buying heroin.
I'm sorry, I don't mean to be mean or overly sarcastic. But I want to know
what got them to pull the trigger; and research, learn, and build bombs. All
this doesn't matter now. But we all are effected negatively by this, and
it's my opinion that we are least rational in this state of mind. Any action
taken at this time would just be knee jerk, and kidding ourselves that it
will fix it.
I really don't want to be blaming anyone or anything right now, but everyone
is defending themselves by pointing the finger in another direction. Here's
a thought: ban schools - if there weren't so many kids all in one spot...
Blessed Be,
Frank
Gale
read to the *end* of a sentence?
freesp...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <37210B60...@futuresouth.com>,
> Gale <ga...@futuresouth.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm inclined to be a strong proponent of gun control
Unindicated snip, followed by his high-strung emotional reaction:
> Why? What gun control would that be? These youths were breaking existing gun
> control laws, (snip)
What I actually said was:
> I'm inclined to be a strong proponent of gun control, but I'm not going
> to
> claim gun control or anything else will "cure" the American propensity
> to
> violence. There are no easy answers.
>
Sort of changes my message, doesn't it?
I have no intention of debating gun control on this newsgroup - it's off-topic, and
rather pointless. If your intention, freespirit73, is to find someone to debate,
please go to the newsgroups William Hughes suggested and argue with someone who
wants to contest the issue --- I don't, and I don't enjoy having my conciliatory
statement rewritten as a call to arms.
freesp...@my-dejanews.com
a period. I also agree it is off topic. I posted thursday that
talk.politics.gun and rec.guns were appropriate.
I have participated in usenet since '94, and I'll be the first to admit I
cannot seem to convey my tone very well and I haven't figured out what's
snipable and not. I too meant to be conciliatory. I was sincere in
wondering what you meant by more gun control. I am not necessarily against
it. I just thought it odd that you say you are for it, but then it won't
solve the problem?
> rather pointless. If your intention, freespirit73, is to find someone to
debate,
Again, I apologize; not my intention.
I just see us (as a nation) looking for scapegoats. When I read the paper, or
watch the news, it seems we are looking to attribute it to a single cause
(preferrably one far removed from ourselves), then be done with it.
For Christians it seems its the Goths and Marilyn Manson. For school
outcasts, it seems its the jocks and prisses who torment them; guns have been
blamed; and I have heard some with the audacity to blame a lack of guns.
I just find hate is the problem, and I don't think banning anything will solve
anything unless we can ban hate.
This was the intention of my post. Once more I apologize for not being clear
and misrepresenting you.
regards,
frank
Gale
> First, let me apologize for snipping your comments, that is why I didn't leave
> a period. I also agree it is off topic. I posted thursday that
> talk.politics.gun and rec.guns were appropriate. (snip)
Thank you. And let me apologize for being a bit nasty in my response. It happens
--- we often misunderstand each other and often convey a message rather different
from our intent. And my point, like yours, is that we can't "fix everything" by
some simple piece of legislation. How do we, as you term it, "ban hate"?
Thank you again, and regards.
silver under the moon
>>> What can have driven to teenage boys to do this, where did they get
>>> these weapons, I don't understand how teenage boys could get their hands
>>> on weapons like that. ?
(SNIP)
>Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
>will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
>
>I do find it very strange, you have no idea how strange, the thought of
>children carrying guns to school is horrifying,
> I gather from one report on the news, that over a million children in
>America take guns to School.
okay there are two things here that people need to sit and think about.
First off is the why - it seems plain to me why this happened and no I did
not go to a school in a large area - my high school was 800 large when I was
a freshman and 1600 large when I graduated. the why I saw - even with that
size of a school. it was made clear to me when they showed the news clips -
the girl who said that they went after people in white hats - they came back
to the school cause that is where they were humiliated. they came back to
the place that hurt them and they wanted to get back at who messed up their
heads.
the second thing is that they did get the guns and that the guns are so
readily available.
ideally the best thing would be for the people in schools or work or home
not to get treated so differently or badly and then to start to get rid of
all of the guns in the world.
now if someone can really figure out world peace or at least a way to stop
the people in the world that are mistreating other people then we can start
to think of something better to use than guns and then start to get rid of
the guns in the world
roo
road angel <road_...@estreet.com> wrote in message
news:371d1...@news.compuvar.com...
>Friends,
>
>It's been a very bad day for those of us who live in Denver. The events at
>Columbine High School won't soon be forgotten, and will surely scar the
>community for years to come.
>
>Light a candle. Say a prayer. Hug your children.
>
>
>: road angel :
>http://spot.colorado.edu/~smithsr
>
Even here is rural Vermont our thoughts, and tears are with you.
Blessed Be
Suzz
roo
Lee Ann <g...@infinet.com> wrote in message
news:372060de...@news2.infinet.com...
>On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:50:17 CST, Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>Is their no laws that such weapons should be in a weapons locker, with
>>good security....?
>>Surely people don't keep guns and live ammunition around where their are
>>children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
>>Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
>>and gave them status.
>>I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
>>when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
>>or even anyone talking about guns.
>
A) I am a pacifist I do not own or carry a gun.
B) Guns don't kill people, frankly people kill people (Yes I know it has
been said before but it bears repeating)
C) Most of the weapons present in the Littleton CO. nightmare were not guns
but explosives made of common materials. Should we ban pipes, gasoline, and
propane tanks? If disturbed people are going to commits acts of mass
destruction they will find a way.
D) There are several thousand gun laws on the books ... the problem with
laws is that 1) they are not enforced well and 2) the definition of a
criminal is someone who breaks laws ; therefore I fail to see how more laws
are going to do anything but keep honest people honest. Joe Killer isn't
going to suddenly give up his gun because now its against the law.
E) Recent news of the investigation seems to indicate that those two dead
children did NOT act alone. There may have been and probably was a criminal
adult element (probably Neo-Nazi in nature given the date) involved. With
that information it is doubtful that gun laws would have done a thing to
prevent this.
F) Maybe we should be asking ourselves what in our society is making so many
young people so damn desprate and what can we do to change it instead of
what can we ban to keep this from happening again.
Ok so maybe it was 4 cents worth
Blessed Be
Suzz
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> the second thing is that they did get the guns and that the guns are so
> readily available.
<snip>
Seems to me the guns are no more than a red herring, however. They had
also made bombs "from materials you can get at Wal-Mart," and I seem to
remember reading or hearing that at least one of the victims was pretty
much shredded by shrapnel from one of their infernal devices. In other
words, the toll would probably have been horrifying even had they no
access to guns at all - one could argue that under those circumstances
they'd probably have perfected their bomb-making skills to create more
lethal ones.
To bring the discussion back to something a (very) little more nearly
resembling "topic" for soc.religion.paganism - has anyone else noticed
the number of girls who have been slaughtered both at Littleton and in
other recent episodes?
This thought was brought home to me by the fact that events at Littleton
transpired in a part of the country I can claim to know well - in which,
in point of fact, I grew up (within a twenty to fifty mile radius of
Littleton, in point of fact). And to include women in such plans seems
unlikely even to have occured to males of my generation in that place -
we were barely fifty years removed from the last gasps of the Wild West
back then, and many of us knew people who had either lived through parts
of that era or had known others who had (some of the Old Man's cousins
met Wild Bill Hickock and Wyatt Earp when they were young, for instance)
and many of the codes of that time and place, including the more or less
sacrosanct status of women, had not yet faded completely. Any
adolescent male back then who included females in such plans would more
than likely have been regarded by his elders, his (male) peers and even
himself as something less than "manly" - a deep disgrace. So deep was
that conditioning that I think it unlikely (note that I do not claim
impossibility, merely unliklihood) that any of my compeers could even
have thought of performing such actions directed at women.
That was thirty to forty years ago, however, and things have changed
somewhat. Women have made great strides towards economic and social
equality (at least compared to what they had then). I am moved,
however, to wonder whether perhaps putting themselves in the line of
fire for such public explosions of murderous rage may not have been one
of the trade-offs for this equality.
This seems to me to be a thought worth consideration in a group where
most of us regard the desirability of equality for women as being a
settled thing.
Blessed be,
Baird
--
Modkin for soc.religion.paganism,
Modstaff for alt.religion.wicca.moderated
"We, the Person" <http://newstaffinc.com/person>
Doug O'Neal
> resembling "topic" for soc.religion.paganism - has anyone else noticed
> the number of girls who have been slaughtered both at Littleton and in
> other recent episodes?
In Colorado, 9 of the 13 victims were male, for what it's worth.
> That was thirty to forty years ago, however, and things have changed
> somewhat. Women have made great strides towards economic and social
> equality (at least compared to what they had then). I am moved,
> however, to wonder whether perhaps putting themselves in the line of
> fire for such public explosions of murderous rage may not have been one
> of the trade-offs for this equality.
>
> This seems to me to be a thought worth consideration in a group where
> most of us regard the desirability of equality for women as being a
> settled thing.
A thought worth consideration, perhaps. But it seems to me that most women
would consider the tradeoffs as well worth it. What's the probability
you'll be the victim of some horrible crime like this, vs. the probability
that sometime in your life you'll need a job or need to borrow money from
the bank and you won't have "a man" to vouch for you? The sacrosanct
status of women had some serious drawbacks for them too -- as in, not being
allowed to get dirty or exert themselves physically, or to hold most jobs
(including ones requiring _intellectual_ acuity -- can't let them overtax
their purty little minds!).
I regard the desirability of women as a very desirable thing, for a number
of reasons....
Doug
Doug O'Neal
> I regard the desirability of women as a very desirable thing, for a
number
> of reasons....
Shit. Inappropriate Freudian slip there? _Equality_ of women is what was
meant, responding to Baird....
As an analogy to his point, I thought of something else ... in the modern
world, in my lifestyle, I commute to work 25 miles each way by car, thus
taking on the non-negligible risk of a fatal accident every day. Would I
give up living in the modern world merely because of this danger? No,
because even 100 years ago I would have had a greater chance of dying
before my time of some disease, not to mention probably not having the
opportunity to pursue the career I really want and am best qualified for
(i.e. family wasn't rich -- could I have afforded a higher education?).
Doug
Stacey A. Lawless
Susan Profit wrote in message <7fqjm4$anc$1...@eskinews.eskimo.com>...
:Pagans who assume they are not capable of killing someone in many cases
:haven't explored their shadow selves. EVERYONE, under certain conditions
:Springfield or other such events and do not understand that the
:perpetrators are more like you than you are willing to admit, you will
:never understand major parts of your motivations, and that can and will
:affect your energy workings.
(snip)
I know that you meant that in a different light from what I'm about to
say, but I'm still glad you said it. Some of my friends and I have been
very rattled by the killings in Littleton, because the guys with the guns
remind us way too much of ourselves when we were in high school. Kind of a
"there but for the grace of God/dess go I" feeling. Not that we were
budding neo-nazis, but high school is sort of like a centrifuge, and all the
fringe-type kids get spun together quickly. I remember daydreaming about
how much fun it would be to develop some kind of splashy Hollywood mutant
power . . . and blow the school to ash and gone with it.
I am sick at heart about what happened at Columbine High, and I know
that all the survivors and families are going to be haunted by the killings
for a long, long time. I can't help but feel a wierd sadness for the
gunmen, though--life often gets better when you get a little older, a little
more sure of yourself. I wish to hell they'd been willing to grit their
teeth and hang on.
--Stacey
Gale
> To bring the discussion back to something a (very) little more nearly
> resembling "topic" for soc.religion.paganism - has anyone else noticed
> the number of girls who have been slaughtered both at Littleton and in
> other recent episodes?
The Littleton episode was something of an exception in that girls were not
the only selected "targets." In one of the other episodes (I think the one
involving the youngest boys), girls were the only targets. Girls were primary
targets in several of the other episodes.
> This thought was brought home to me by the fact that events at Littleton
> transpired in a part of the country I can claim to know well - in which,
> in point of fact, I grew up (within a twenty to fifty mile radius of
> Littleton, in point of fact). And to include women in such plans seems
> unlikely even to have occured to males of my generation in that place -
> we were barely fifty years removed from the last gasps of the Wild West
> back then, and many of us knew people who had either lived through parts
> of that era or had known others who had (some of the Old Man's cousins
> met Wild Bill Hickock and Wyatt Earp when they were young, for instance)
> and many of the codes of that time and place, including the more or less
> sacrosanct status of women, had not yet faded completely. Any
> adolescent male back then who included females in such plans would more
> than likely have been regarded by his elders, his (male) peers and even
> himself as something less than "manly" - a deep disgrace. So deep was
> that conditioning that I think it unlikely (note that I do not claim
> impossibility, merely unliklihood) that any of my compeers could even
> have thought of performing such actions directed at women.
Adolescent girls have always been the targets of certain types of physical
assault at the hands of adolescent boys -- ranging from teasing, touching,
and mild physical abuse through sexual assault (with only "bad" girls
targeted for the latter --- usually).
However, you are quite correct in noting that for a boy to fight with a girl
or to assault a girl outside a dating / sexual context would have been
considered extremely abnormal. And a boy who went berserk with a gun would
likely have centered his attack on someone bigger than he -- someone he
perceived as a "bully."
My resident expert (my spouse, the psych. professor) has told me several
reasons for this contemporary phenomenon, related to adolescent male hormones
and contemporary culture. I've promptly forgotten all of them, except that a
"fundamentalist" style of religion was practiced by a number of their
families.
I'm quite interested in your question, because there are many good reasons
for boys to not perceive girls as physical threats. On average, males are
considerably bigger than females --- enough bigger that, for example, the
out-of-shape middle aged male writing this message is stronger than most
females (conditioned athletes excepted). It isn't just some out-of-fashion
notion of chivalry; it's an obvious biological difference --- and one which
would have had very unfortunate implications for the human species if males
had habitually treated females as just part of the same "pecking order." I'm
not big on sociobiology, but I think this question applies.
> That was thirty to forty years ago, however, and things have changed
> somewhat. Women have made great strides towards economic and social
> equality (at least compared to what they had then). I am moved,
> however, to wonder whether perhaps putting themselves in the line of
> fire for such public explosions of murderous rage may not have been one
> of the trade-offs for this equality.
Is it the image of the "successful woman" or is it another image --- the
Hollywood action movie image? The action movie has always required a female
companion to the hero: beautiful, sensible, etc. The contemporary ones (those
that I've seen unpleasant snatches of, considering that their plots consist
of "how many things can we blow up?") include women who are physically
strong: conditioned athletes with martial arts training, etc. This is the
image that matches the context of berserkers with guns --- how many of these
deranged kids are playing out a Hollywood style script, and looking forward
to seeing "blood & guts splatter" in the fashion of these inane movies?
> This seems to me to be a thought worth consideration in a group where
> most of us regard the desirability of equality for women as being a
> settled thing.
Agreed. And why, in the context of 20th. century society with its emphasis on
success through various forms of mental acuity, does pop culture lock onto
this notion of physical prowess (or the ability to blow things up) as
indicative of power? The definition is more silly than just out-of-date, but
links to the destructive obsession with weapons exhibited by the perpetrators
of these incidents.
A.Lizard
<jes...@ezl.com> wrote:
>(SNIP)
>
>>>> What can have driven to teenage boys to do this, where did they get
>>>> these weapons, I don't understand how teenage boys could get their hands
>>>> on weapons like that. ?
>
>
>(SNIP)
>
>>Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
>>will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
>>
>>I do find it very strange, you have no idea how strange, the thought of
>>children carrying guns to school is horrifying,
>> I gather from one report on the news, that over a million children in
>>America take guns to School.
>
>
>okay there are two things here that people need to sit and think about.
>First off is the why - it seems plain to me why this happened and no I did
>not go to a school in a large area - my high school was 800 large when I was
>a freshman and 1600 large when I graduated. the why I saw - even with that
>size of a school. it was made clear to me when they showed the news clips -
>the girl who said that they went after people in white hats - they came back
>to the school cause that is where they were humiliated. they came back to
>the place that hurt them and they wanted to get back at who messed up their
>heads.
>
>the second thing is that they did get the guns and that the guns are so
>readily available.
>
>ideally the best thing would be for the people in schools or work or home
>not to get treated so differently or badly and then to start to get rid of
>all of the guns in the world.
>
>now if someone can really figure out world peace or at least a way to stop
>the people in the world that are mistreating other people then we can start
>to think of something better to use than guns and then start to get rid of
>the guns in the world
>
The shooters HAD found something better than guns. They'd planted
bombs all over the school. If they'd detonated them instead of
shooting, the death toll would have been hundreds or possibly
thousands, not hundreds. We'll never know why they didn't do
this.
The "something better" was propane canisters of the sort you can
get at any Wal-Mart or (insert large department store chain of
your choice).
That's just one example. In your home, there are probably dozens
of things that can be made to explode. They're called aerosol
cans. There's a bomb parked in your garage. It's the gas tank of
your car.
Not one of these items takes a rocket scientist to make it
explode... even without access to "anarchy" files from the
Internet.
If we were to remove all the potentally explosive devices from
the world, society couldn't function.
The other point is that there is a legitimate purpose for guns in
private hands. If you're a 90 pound woman with a 250 pound male
intruder in your home, a 911 call that takes 20 minutes to
deliver help isn't a whole lot of help. The only way to handle
that problem (unless that woman is a martial arts expert) is with
armed help, and the timeframe in that situation means that that
woman is the only probable source of that help. If that help
doesn't arrive, she's screwed, possibly literally.
A.Lizard
************************************************************************
Do What Thou Wilt Shalt Be The Whole Of The Law.
Love Is The Law, Love Under Will.
"Ask not what your country can do for you...ask what your country can do
*to* you." - Tiekbane
"Anybody who still believes in the media must have been in a coma for the past 30 years." - Robert Anton Wilson
Personal Web site http://www.ecis.com/~alizard
pagan site - http://www.ecis.com/~alizard/pagan.html
For reliable year 2000 info, go to:
http://www.ecis.com/~alizard/y2k.html
backup address (if ALL else fails) ali...@usa.net
PGP 2.6.2 key available by request,keyserver,or on my Web site
"I regret to say that we of the F.B.I. are powerless to act in cases of
oral-genital intimacy, unless it has in some way obstructed interstate
commerce." -- J. Edgar Hoover
Find out what I think of the Littleton school killings at:
http://www.ecis.com/~alizard/littleto.html
************************************************************************
Doug O'Neal
Baird Stafford <ba...@gate.net> wrote in article
<1dqtjcf.38c...@tskis2-5.gate.net>...
>
> This thought was brought home to me by the fact that events at Littleton
> transpired in a part of the country I can claim to know well - in which,
> in point of fact, I grew up (within a twenty to fifty mile radius of
> Littleton, in point of fact). And to include women in such plans seems
> unlikely even to have occured to males of my generation in that place -
> we were barely fifty years removed from the last gasps of the Wild West
> back then, and many of us knew people who had either lived through parts
> of that era or had known others who had (some of the Old Man's cousins
> met Wild Bill Hickock and Wyatt Earp when they were young, for instance)
> and many of the codes of that time and place, including the more or less
> sacrosanct status of women, had not yet faded completely. Any
> adolescent male back then who included females in such plans would more
> than likely have been regarded by his elders, his (male) peers and even
> himself as something less than "manly" - a deep disgrace. So deep was
> that conditioning that I think it unlikely (note that I do not claim
> impossibility, merely unliklihood) that any of my compeers could even
> have thought of performing such actions directed at women.
>
> somewhat. Women have made great strides towards economic and social
> equality (at least compared to what they had then). I am moved,
> however, to wonder whether perhaps putting themselves in the line of
> fire for such public explosions of murderous rage may not have been one
> of the trade-offs for this equality.
One more thought on this. Two and a half years ago, an
emotionally-disturbed 20-year-old _woman_ took out a military rifle on a
lawn at Penn State and killed one person and injured two others before
being tackled by a heroic passerby. A local radio talk show host commented
that _this_ is one of the byproducts of womens equality ... women can
_commit_ these crimes now too.
Doug
silver under the moon
>The other point is that there is a legitimate purpose for guns in
>private hands. If you're a 90 pound woman with a 250 pound male
>intruder in your home, a 911 call that takes 20 minutes to
>deliver help isn't a whole lot of help. The only way to handle
>that problem (unless that woman is a martial arts expert) is with
>armed help, and the timeframe in that situation means that that
>woman is the only probable source of that help. If that help
>doesn't arrive, she's screwed, possibly literally.
(SNIP)
OH? so there is an alternative to guns and bombs?
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> Is it the image of the "successful woman" or is it another image --- the
> Hollywood action movie image? The action movie has always required a female
> companion to the hero: beautiful, sensible, etc. The contemporary ones (those
> that I've seen unpleasant snatches of, considering that their plots consist
> of "how many things can we blow up?") include women who are physically
> strong: conditioned athletes with martial arts training, etc. This is the
> image that matches the context of berserkers with guns --- how many of these
> deranged kids are playing out a Hollywood style script, and looking forward
> to seeing "blood & guts splatter" in the fashion of these inane movies?
<snip>
I'm not entirely certain that either image applies, to tell the truth.
I'm more inclined to think that the idea that women *are* equal to men
has taken root and removed any reason to regard them as a special class
deserving of extra consideration one way or another. It seems to me
from the accounts that have so far come out of that episode that the
girls who were killed were at risk rather because of who than of what
they were, if I may phrase it in that fashion: because they chose to
excel in activities (sports, drama) which were anathema to the murderers
rather than because they were female.
One reason I think it behooves us to consider this possibility is
because if I could think of it, so could any Fundie preacher - and he'd
try to turn it against us. It seems to me that if we can hash it out
here, amongst friends as it were, we might be better prepared to face
such people in other arenas.
By the way, Gale, don't be so hard on the explosions. All the FX people
I ever met had the minds of ten-year-old boys regardless of physical age
or sex. Those who specialize in explosions are eight, tops.
Angela Wyatt
wrote:
>To bring the discussion back to something a (very) little more nearly
>resembling "topic" for soc.religion.paganism - has anyone else noticed
>the number of girls who have been slaughtered both at Littleton and in
>other recent episodes?
>
>This thought was brought home to me by the fact that events at Littleton
>transpired in a part of the country I can claim to know well - in which,
>in point of fact, I grew up (within a twenty to fifty mile radius of
>Littleton, in point of fact). And to include women in such plans seems
>unlikely even to have occured to males of my generation in that place -
>we were barely fifty years removed from the last gasps of the Wild West
>back then, and many of us knew people who had either lived through parts
>of that era or had known others who had (some of the Old Man's cousins
>met Wild Bill Hickock and Wyatt Earp when they were young, for instance)
>and many of the codes of that time and place, including the more or less
>sacrosanct status of women, had not yet faded completely. Any
>adolescent male back then who included females in such plans would more
>than likely have been regarded by his elders, his (male) peers and even
>himself as something less than "manly" - a deep disgrace. So deep was
>that conditioning that I think it unlikely (note that I do not claim
>impossibility, merely unliklihood) that any of my compeers could even
>have thought of performing such actions directed at women.
I think if you could ask black, Native American or immigrant women of
the time, they may have had a different take on the "sacrosanct status
of women". However, you are right that, in general, women were less
likely to be targets of violence.
But they were still targets. If you were a successful woman, you paid
a price socially. You were considered "odd". You didn't get invited
to join social groups. You either never were dated, or men thought
you were a "tramp". Other women saw you as an abnormal. You
would have effectively been isolated from the rest of the community.
If you were a woman who was attacked, you were unlikely to report
it, because of stigma. You "obviously asked for it" or you "had
your reputation ruined" by the attack. That type of attitude is
as much an attack as the violence itself.
The news also didn't report things like this before. Imagine this
scenario: A Catholic school gets a bomb threat one morning by
a man claiming he wants to kill "a bunch of pope-lovers". The
school is evacuated and a search is made. No bomb is found.
In the school.
But in the playground, where the children were sent, a bomb is found
under the merry-go-round.
If this were to happen now it would make national, if not global,
news. Reporters would be camped out, "experts" would be talking
about how such a man could exist, and editorals would be all over
the place.
When it _did_ happen in the early 1970s, it didn't even make local
news. It was my school when I was in first grade. The school was only
about 30 miles from Baltimore. Not a single TV, radio or paper from
the city carried the story.
>That was thirty to forty years ago, however, and things have changed
>somewhat. Women have made great strides towards economic and social
>equality (at least compared to what they had then). I am moved,
>however, to wonder whether perhaps putting themselves in the line of
>fire for such public explosions of murderous rage may not have been one
>of the trade-offs for this equality.
I'm not sure it's accurate to relate the violence with women's strides
towards equity. Women weren't being specifically targeted in these
attacks. Plus a bomb doesn't care what gender you are.
In this attack, the only way females could have been safe was if they
weren't students.
There certainly exists segments of society to are angered by the
changing social status of women, and minorities, but this attack
doesn't seem to be a result of that.
Angela
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> OH? so there is an alternative to guns and bombs?
Not if the 250-pound male is *also* an expert in the martial arts. A
90-pound woman would still be better off with a gun in her hand.
Shez
<ba...@gate.net> writes><snip>
>have thought of performing such actions directed at women.
>
>somewhat. Women have made great strides towards economic and social
>equality (at least compared to what they had then). I am moved,
>however, to wonder whether perhaps putting themselves in the line of
>fire for such public explosions of murderous rage may not have been one
>of the trade-offs for this equality.
>
>most of us regard the desirability of equality for women as being a
>settled thing.
Even if equality put them in the line of fire Baird it would be better
than the world I was born into, where women really were second class
citizens, were they were thought to be strange if they read books or
decided to do what would then have been considered a mans job.
I cant explain to anyone who did not experience the rage and frustration
of women of that period, knowing you were perfectly capable of doing
things, and being denied the chance because of prejudice. especially
after a war in which they had basically kept the country running, turned
out munitions, ran the factory's, looked after children, ect.
It was social conditioning, not just of women but of men to, the young
men I knew were also conditioned to think that they could not get any
further than their fathers did, that they were going into jobs like
mining, and other physical work, it was just as hard for them, the few
that escaped and made more of their lives, were generally hated, because
they had escaped,
If your faced with nothing but what your mother had, to be a wife, a
mother tied to the kitchen sink, and pregnant, then its soul destroying,
I don't mean that men who treat women today with politeness are wrong,
they are not, its just that such politeness shouldn't carry the stigma
of being polite simply because the poor women are not capable of looking
out for themselves.
We cant turn the wheel back, women have broken out of that stereotype,
and that's as it should be. the boys who murdered those girls and boys
were wrong, the girls and the other victims were not to blame,
Even if this happened I would still say it was worth it, no doubt those
minority's who were kept as slaves, or pushed down, by the majority
would feel the same way.
>
>Blessed be,
>Baird
>
>
>
>
--
Shez sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk
The 'Old Craft' lady http://www.oldcity.demon.co.uk/shez/
Shez
>The other point is that there is a legitimate purpose for guns in
>private hands. If you're a 90 pound woman with a 250 pound male
>intruder in your home, a 911 call that takes 20 minutes to
>deliver help isn't a whole lot of help. The only way to handle
>that problem (unless that woman is a martial arts expert) is with
>armed help, and the timeframe in that situation means that that
>woman is the only probable source of that help. If that help
>doesn't arrive, she's screwed, possibly literally.
She is probably screwed anyway, because if the intruder also has a gun
then it equal everything out, the woman is still not likely to be
physically stronger than her attacker, and unless she has been trained
to use the gun, their is every likely hood it would be turned on her,
shooting someone is not as easy as it sounds, and most people would
hesitate, that hesitation is enough to kill you or get you raped.
having the gun is not a lot of use if you cant use it, or hesitate,
because it might be a child or a husband.
>
> A.Lizard
>
>************************************************************************
Shez
<ti...@eskimo.com> writes
>Pagans who assume they are not capable of killing someone in many cases
>haven't explored their shadow selves. EVERYONE, under certain conditions
>is capable of killing people, and if you look at event like Littleton or
>Springfield or other such events and do not understand that the
>perpetrators are more like you than you are willing to admit, you will
>never understand major parts of your motivations, and that can and will
>affect your energy workings.
Susan , I am perfectly aware I would kill if my life or my family's were
in danger, and I would do so without remorse, this has nothing to do
with the problem of children shooting each other.
Its a huge difference between defending yourself, and cold bloody
killing simply for the joy of it, which is what it seems happened in
this case.
>
>In article <Dmpc0dAY...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>,
>Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> What can have driven to teenage boys to do this?
>
>I do not know in this specific case. However, it is not uncommon for some
>people when faced with despair to commit suicide. There have historically
>been many people who, when faced with overwhelming odds in battle or in
>life, decided to take as many of those who would make life difficult for
>their survivors or who have been in opposition to them with them.
Committing suicide at 18 and taking out lots of other teenagers with
you, is not normal, those teenagers would not have affected their
family's, or made life difficult for them,
it seems from the reports they were hitting those who had made their
life difficult in school, but it happens to nearly everyone, you don't
normally go around killing people because you got bullied or called
names. -
>
>The Hungarians honor those who, when faced with the certain fall of
>specific fortress lovingly killed their wives and children to spare them
>the rapes and tortures that were inevitably the fate of Turkinsh captives
>at the time, and at then dawn bravely swarmed out of the fortress to take
>as many Turks with them as they could before they were all massacred. Many
>other European nations have traditions of 'take as many with you as you
>can before you die' when faced with certain defeat as well - and
>Berserkers were a variation on that theme that didn't need there to be
>overwhelming odds to go into battle in this state. Japan has long had a
>tradition of soldiers and those related to soldiers who willingly
>sacrificed themselves to save or try to save others, trying to destroy
>their enemies in the process. Cultures that glorify such things have to
>accept that there are minds that will twist them to personal revenge.
That is battle, and battle is not glory its messy , painful and
horrible, their are no winners in the end everyone involved is affected,
Their are always those who turn such things to personal revenge, and it
can cause problems for centuries, look at Ireland and Serbia.
I have never understood the need to glorify war or killing,
>
>There are some few murder/suicides that when investigated come down to the
>supposed 'healthy' partner either discovering they are faced with death
>from a terminal illness themselves or from suicidal depression taking the
>life of a child/parent/spouse who will be unable to care for themselves
>after their suicide. Far more common is the suicide who takes revenge on
>the partner who has driven them (in their own minds) to the suicide. This
>is a pattern that is particularly dangerous to battered women who try to
>leave some partners, but it can also be the motivation for the ex-employee
>who goes after their former co-workers and supervisors or the killer who
>goes after a supposed oppressor group and kills themselves when they are
>trapped. This is nothing more than an extension of the behavior that was
>thought honorable in battle, but is no longer considered acceptable on a
>personal level modernly.
That is a matter of training, while we see films and movies that glorify
death and war, people will consider it to be normal, the one man against
the system type movie, Rambo, glorified a man who was obviously not
coping with his experiences in Vietnam, the more he went out on a limb
the more people though he was brave.
>
>There is nothing new in human behavior in such patterns. And when cultures
>have tales and legends of such behavior being honorable, there is little
>incentive for some people to stop and realize they are using them as
>justification for no longer acceptable forms of behavior.
>
>Is this what happened in Colorado? How would I know? But I am NOT surprised
>when someone who considers themselves to be despairing enough to commit
>suicide decides to take someone or many someones with them because it is
>all too human a behavior pattern historically.
If I am going to suffer so they will they. the silly part is, that
nothing comes of it, I bet when those boys actually got to the moment
when they had to take their own lives, and it would have been impossible
by then to not do it, they would have been desperate, and as frightened
as those they killed. it wasn't bravery, it was a sickness. and why
didn't someone pick it up... then again, why should they pick it up,
really the only people who could see they were behaving in very odd
ways, was their family and close friends.
>
> @}->- ;) Tinne :D Laughter Heals :) -<-{@
>
--
Shez
<g...@infinet.com> writes
>On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:50:17 CST, Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>Is their no laws that such weapons should be in a weapons locker, with
>>good security....?
>>Surely people don't keep guns and live ammunition around where their are
>>children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
>>Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
>>and gave them status.
>>I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
>>when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
>>or even anyone talking about guns.
>
>large, access and use are pretty unregulated. Every time someone tries
>to pass any sort of gun control measure, some Americans start pointing
>at the Second Amendment to our Constitution. ("A well regulated
>Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of
>the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.)
A militia is a very different proposition to personal ownership of guns.
!
>
>Some people argue that that means Americans should be able to own and
>use whatever guns they like; I, and others, disagree. But for now, it
>means that there are minimal restrictions on what kinds of "Arms"
>Americans have access to.
>
>A lot of people are stupid. They keep loaded guns around kids. They
>don't lock their guns and ammo separately. There are stories every
>year about how some little kid gets ahold of a loaded gun, and shoots
>a little friend while they're playing. But we still don't want gun
>laws (as a nation; personally, I'd like to see a lot more gun
>control).
I would be worried sick if their were guns in my home, and I had young
children, unless their is a good security system they will find them ,
and use them.
children are always curious, and if Dad and their relatives wonder
round with guns, and show off, then the children will automatically do
the same.
>
>As a side note: The National Rifle Association (NRA), possible the
>largest single opponent to any gun control legislation, is having its
>national convention in Colorado this week. Despite the tragedy, they
>refuse to cancel (despite calls to do so from numerous public
>figures). To give them a little credit, they did cancel a gun show
>that was supposed to be part of the "festivities".
>
>>Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
>>will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
>
>They've been tightening up, but there's a limit to what you can do.
>Unless they are willing to turn our schools into little prisons,
>complete with individual, daily searches and locked doors, there will
>always be a way for kids to get a gun into a school, if they really
>want to.
True, and its a frightening thought,
>
>>I do find it very strange, you have no idea how strange, the thought of
>>children carrying guns to school is horrifying,
>> I gather from one report on the news, that over a million children in
>>America take guns to School.
>
>It is horrifying. What's more horrifying is the lack of parenting
>going on in many (not all, to be sure) of these cases.
Obviously, no caring parent would allow their children to carry guns
the arguments I have seen that if other children at the school had also
had guns this would not have happened seems ludicrous.
>
>>I noticed the headline on one of the newspapers, today, most of them
>>carried the news, but this one said, "God help America. " I think
>>everyone over here is shocked, we went through the horror of Dunblain
>>only a few years ago, but that was a very sick man, and the reaction to
>>ban guns, was something that was welcomed by the majority of people in
>>this country.
>>But banning guns is not something that will happen in America, its to
>>deeply entrenched, and your constitution guarantees that you can carry
>>guns,
>>I wish I could see a solution, but their isn't one, unless every child
>>is searched or goes through metal detectors and all schools have
>>security guards, which is also a horrifying idea.
>
>Exactly. Since we will not control guns in this country, incidents
>like this are bound to happen in one setting or another. You'd be
>pretty shocked at the murder rates for even one of our large cities,
>too. :-(
Yes I gather they are pretty high, in my City a murder is front page
news for weeks,
>
>>People in England are very sad for all the parents and students
>>involved, we all hurt when children are killed like this, I hope this
>>never happens again in your country or mine.
>
>I think we all hope that. But, unfortunately, I don't think that hope
>will be enough, by itself.
No, your right of course their needs to be a close look at what's
happening, but if guns are socially accepted, then its going to get
worse not better.
>
>Blessings,
>
>Lee Ann
Shez
writes
snip
>Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
>> and gave them status.
>
>Yeah, well, all the Rambo type movies, of the loner being wronged,
>using a gun, killing all the meanies and being a hero is a new
>archetype. But, it's like all movies, ain't like that in real life.
>Hookers don't look like Kim Basinger, either.
>I always thought of using guns in terms of yelling, screaming, the
>smell of blood, shit and piss . .. don't know where I got that
>from, maybe a past life or something. but the movies make killing
>look easy. And using a gun is easy. Not as easy as bombing, mind you,
>because with a gun you at least have to look at your target most of the
>time.
You got the right picture,if your in a war, and if its bombs as well as
guns the smell of blood shit, and piss is very strong, the shock of
being hit makes you empty your bowels and bladder, pure fear can do that
as well, its a survival instinct, emptying your bowels and bladder,
allows you to run faster carrying less body weight.
I saw enough killing in the second world war, with bombs to make me anti
bombs and guns for the rest of my life,
their is nothing heroic about being blown apart by a bomb.
America has never been attacked or bombed, only Pearl harbour, it
changes you, and it changes your society. perhaps that is the
difference, socially, that Britain was attacked and bombed,
>
>> I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
>> when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
>> or even anyone talking about guns.
>
>I met a britcop once, at the sfpd firing range.
>He was a bit nonplussed at all the guns everywhere.
>He didn't want to carry one himself.
>Don't blame him.
British cops don't want to carry guns, they realise if they carry guns
the criminals will to, the vast majority of criminals don't carry guns,
because the penalty especially for shooting a cop is life not 10 to 20,
even threatening a cop with a gun or knife has huge penalty's attached.
The police here who go into situations where guns are used, hostages,
embassy's and such are specially chosen and trained, cops on the beat
don't use guns. We don't want them to, and they don't want to.
>
>snip
>> I do find it very strange, you have no idea how strange, the thought of
>> children carrying guns to school is horrifying,
>> I gather from one report on the news, that over a million children in
>> America take guns to School.
>
>"yeahbut" most of those kids are poor minority kids, and so america
>don't really care, after all, you can't expect "those people" to
>know how to behave. Just look at the stats on criminal violence/death
>for poor/minority kids, compared to white punks from the 'burbs, but
>those lives are not as meritorious, or so it would seem.
What a strange idea. children are children, in fact minority's often
push for their children to have an even better education, knowing its
the one way they have to get them out of a poverty trap.
>
>
>> People in England are very sad for all the parents and students
>> involved, we all hurt when children are killed like this, I hope this
>> never happens again in your country or mine.
>
>It will.
>It's not that new a thing.
>What is different is the media pumping up these stories.
>
>Hell, back in the 1800s, there was this thing called "cabin fever"
>people would whack out, kill everyone, and the bodies wouldn't be
>found until the spring thaw. Shit happens.
>
>But what I DON'T understand is why the parents of the shooters didn't
>do something about their kids when it was obvious they were over the
>points, and if *I* had tried to build bombs in our garage, Mom would
>have killed me herself.
>AND if only those assholeadministrators would stop jockitches
>from tormenting outsiders, don't give me that "boys will be boys"
>bullshit for their raping girls and gaybashing that they do.
>I mean, face it, this was an extroverted suicide, they wanted to die
>and take everyone with them. Maybe if the popular kids hadn't been
>such assholes . .. .
>
Are these jocks, sports oriented kids, allowed to get away with so much
simply because they have a talent for sport ?, surely its more important
that they have a talent for using their brains, sports is not the reason
your going to school, its to be educated,
It would be better to spend the money on bright children, to allow them
to get ahead, and on children who need more help than the average,
Bullying is always a problem but if the school don't take a firm stand
on it, then they loose pupils,
>If you kick a dog long enough, you can get even a Labrador
>to bite.
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
--
Shez
dejanews.com writes
>Merry Meet Shez,
>
>> Is their no laws that such weapons should be in a weapons locker, with
>> good security....?
>
>
>> Surely people don't keep guns and live ammunition around where their are
>> children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
>> and gave them status.
>
>them big and give them status; there are those who think so about alcohol;
>then there are those who do both. I think some people think so little of
>themselves, that they use material things to boost their ego. It is sad.
Young people are into peer status, anything that makes them look big, or
tough is in. so fast cars, guns, alcohol, drugs, are ways of being part
of a peer group. most grow out of it, and many become their own person,
realising that a personal identity is much better than a group identity,
but some people never grow up. or mature enough to be able to rely on
their own personality, outside of a peer group.
>
>I own a gun. I rarely carry it. Most recently when my car broke down in a
>bad neighborhood on my way home from work (I get off at midnight). I keep it
>in my trunk in a lock box. It is worth more than my car, so I took it with
>me on my ten mile walk home. I was raised by a single woman. I was allowed
>to hunt and target shoot without asking permission. I just went. I was
>twelve. I didn't think I was big; most kids did this.
Its something I cant imagine quite honestly, but then Britain and
America are worlds apart when it comes to the social use of guns.
>
>> I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
>> when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
>> or even anyone talking about guns.
>
>I think you went to St. Louis, right? Missouri does not allow its citizenry
>to carry guns without what it considers good reason (many states ignore the
>Constitution, as many in our religion are aware). Here in Indiana I have to
>undergo county, state, and FBI background checks. I don't have to have a
>particular reason to apply though. If you have a DUI, felony, or misdemeanor
>on domestic violence, you can't carry.
I suppose if you did have such a background you could get a gun anyway,
just by stealing or on the black market. ?
>
>I'm sorry, this is off topic (rec.guns and talk.politics.guns is going over
>this extensively). But despite the press and movie images, gun advocates are
>not obsessed with guns; with many of us, it is a normal hobby.
If people are trained to use guns, and don't see them as a macho
extension of their personality's, ( and sometimes their penis ) then it
wouldn't be a problem, perhaps schools should teach people how to use
guns, and how to take care of them. so they are just a hobby and not a
status symbol.
I know a British man who goes to America to use guns, he has tons of
pictures of himself in combat gear, with huge guns, he is quite honestly
as mad as a hatter, if he could use guns in this country he would have
shot someone by now.
He is short, skinny and looks like a ferret, for some reason he thinks
guns make him look like Arnold Schwarzeneger, they don't, they make him
look like a ferret trying to hold up a gun five times to big for him.
the silly thing is , he is a total coward in reality, If I yelled at him
he would run like a rabbit.
>
>> I don't think the difference between one rifle or another matters really
>> they both kill.
>
>Yes.
>
>> Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
>> will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
>
>Yes, they have, are, and will increase.
Its sad, but its necessary I think, unless their are gun laws that cover
every state and are upheld by every state their will always be problems.
>
>> I wish I could see a solution, but their isn't one, unless every child
>> is searched or goes through metal detectors and all schools have
>> security guards, which is also a horrifying idea.
>
>We do in Indianapolis. They have metal detectors that kids randomly have to
>go through. They don't have security guards, the school corporation employs
>its own police force. They have drug sniffing dogs too. Cameras also.
>Random patdowns and locker searches. Until recently, if a youth were
>suspended for any reason, they had to pass a drug test to get back in. One
>school has banned profanity. They claim it works
Sounds like the children are in prison....all that money that could have
been used on educating the kids, now going into stopping them from
bringing guns into the school.
>
>> People in England are very sad for all the parents and students
>> involved, we all hurt when children are killed like this, I hope this
>> never happens again in your country or mine.
>
>I hope so too. I am afraid though. The day this happened a student here was
>arrested for having a gun at school. Last year a first grader was! I don't
>no, maybe gun control is a way. I doubt it though. When horrible things
>happen, we look for causes, then ban the hell out of them (whether they were
>the real and only causes or not). I hear they are blaming Marilyn Manson and
>the Goth movement; in Denver they cancelled his April 30th show. Yes guns can
>do more than knives, but remember what Jim Jones (another fine Hoosier) did
>with some kool-aid and stricnine?
Jim Jones ?......
If someone wants to kill they will find a way, but most people don't
want to kill, and if their are no weapons handy they usually will not
kill, the chances are that their opponents might take them apart.
>
>Blessed be,
>Frank
c.c.sb...@69.killspam.us.com
> I know that you meant that in a different light from what I'm about to
> say, but I'm still glad you said it. Some of my friends and I have been
> very rattled by the killings in Littleton, because the guys with the guns
> remind us way too much of ourselves when we were in high school. Kind of a
> "there but for the grace of God/dess go I" feeling. Not that we were
> budding neo-nazis, but high school is sort of like a centrifuge, and all the
> fringe-type kids get spun together quickly. I remember daydreaming about
> how much fun it would be to develop some kind of splashy Hollywood mutant
> power . . . and blow the school to ash and gone with it.
I got ragged on royally on one list for saying the truth, that a part of
me was jealous of the kids that shot up Columbine, and planned to blow
the school to smithereens. I remember trying to figure out how to get away
with planting explosives at my high school, and trigger them when no one
was there. No, I never carried through with my fantasies, not even as far
as buying the pipes for pipe bombs. But I had them. I understand VERY
well the pressures that pushed Harris and Kleybold into insanity, into
taking vengeful fantasies into reality.
Yes, there but for the grace of the Goddes go I.
> I am sick at heart about what happened at Columbine High, and I know
> that all the survivors and families are going to be haunted by the killings
> for a long, long time. I can't help but feel a wierd sadness for the
> gunmen, though--life often gets better when you get a little older, a little
> more sure of yourself. I wish to hell they'd been willing to grit their
> teeth and hang on.
But they didn't have what I had: parents who tried to keep track of what I
was doing, and they had WAY too much easy spending cash.
Ravan
--
Ravan Asteris rasteris / at \ rahul / dot \ net
(squish "/ and \" to make symbols like "&")
http://www.rahul.net/rasteris/
virtuo...@hotmail.com
Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <7fq8qk$5lo$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, virtuo...@hotmail.com
> >I met a britcop once, at the sfpd firing range.
> >He was a bit nonplussed at all the guns everywhere.
> >He didn't want to carry one himself.
> >Don't blame him.
>
> British cops don't want to carry guns, they realise if they carry guns
> the criminals will to, the vast majority of criminals don't carry guns,
> because the penalty especially for shooting a cop is life not 10 to 20,
> even threatening a cop with a gun or knife has huge penalty's attached.
A penalty is one thing, making sure that the defendant gets that
penalty is another, esp. here in the usa. Most defendants plea-bargain.
You just don't have so many guns there, after all. I don't think even
most of british criminals want guns . .. I heard the horrible story
about the crime reporter getting gunned down outside her door. I can imagine
how horrified everyone there is.
> The police here who go into situations where guns are used, hostages,
> embassy's and such are specially chosen and trained, cops on the beat
> don't use guns. We don't want them to, and they don't want to.
After seeing what goes on here, shows a great deal of sense!
We have specially trained cops that use heavy weaponry, called
SWAT. They are cops who have special training, but even that
is no guarantee . .. the reporst coming out of colorado indicate
that the two guys who started it killed themselves quickly, and
the cops could have moved in more quickly; they may have been shooting
in response to other cops' shooting! As my ex boyfriend (sfpd swat dude)
would say, "what a cluster." Still, how can anyone train for the
unexpected, and there is nothing you can do to stop a suicidal gunperson
'cept shoot 'em. You know what's kinda funny, turns out those idiots
didn't know how to make bombs--they didn't WORK! They wanted to
take out the whole school; perhaps when they realized they weren't
Ted Kaczinsky they shot themselves out of pure chagrin.
snip
> >But what I DON'T understand is why the parents of the shooters didn't
> >do something about their kids when it was obvious they were over the
> >points, and if *I* had tried to build bombs in our garage, Mom would
> >have killed me herself.
> >AND if only those assholeadministrators would stop jockitches
> >from tormenting outsiders, don't give me that "boys will be boys"
> >bullshit for their raping girls and gaybashing that they do.
> >I mean, face it, this was an extroverted suicide, they wanted to die
> >and take everyone with them. Maybe if the popular kids hadn't been
> >such assholes . .. .
> >
> Are these jocks, sports oriented kids, allowed to get away with so much
> simply because they have a talent for sport ?,
You betcha.
However, I took advantage of certain liberties because I was
on the debate team and got high test scores. I early learned the
value of ridicule in silencing the assholes, and my way of coping
was to just ignore them. There's no way for them to respond to
that.
> surely its more important
> that they have a talent for using their brains, sports is not the reason
> your going to school, its to be educated,
> It would be better to spend the money on bright children, to allow them
> to get ahead, and on children who need more help than the average,
> Bullying is always a problem but if the school don't take a firm stand
> on it, then they loose pupils,
I think at last people will pay a little more attention.
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> America has never been attacked or bombed, only Pearl harbour, it
> changes you, and it changes your society. perhaps that is the
> difference, socially, that Britain was attacked and bombed,
I'm sorry, Shez, but the statement about the US simply isn't true. We
were attacked in 1754 by the French and again in 1776 by a country I
shan't name just at present - the Second Ammendment was, according to my
history teachers in high school, meant largely to ensure that if another
tyrrany should grow in future "the people" would have weapons with which
to stage another armed insurrection - and again in 1812 by the second
country mentioned above (according to our National Anthem, bombs were
definitely involved in that one...). And, of course, in 1864 half the
country was not only attacked and bombed but physically invaded by the
other half (we still bear scars from that one, though they are not as
prominent as they were when I was young and veterans of that conflict
were still alive - ancient, but alive and marching in Veterans' Day
parades).
I will agree, however, that the wars in which a nation has engaged quite
definitely shapes its character.
<snip>
> Are these jocks, sports oriented kids, allowed to get away with so much
> simply because they have a talent for sport ?, surely its more important
> that they have a talent for using their brains, sports is not the reason
> your going to school, its to be educated,
> It would be better to spend the money on bright children, to allow them
> to get ahead, and on children who need more help than the average,
> Bullying is always a problem but if the school don't take a firm stand
> on it, then they loose pupils,
Oh, yes - very Public School, that, that the chaps who are good at games
are allowed priveleges not permitted to lesser mortals. I think it may
have more to do with adolescence than with the country in which the
adolescents reside.
Gale
> <snip>
> I'm sorry, Shez, but the statement about the US simply isn't true. We
> were attacked in 1754 by the French and again in 1776 by a country I
> shan't name just at present - the Second Ammendment was, according to my
> history teachers in high school, meant largely to ensure that if another
> tyrrany should grow in future "the people" would have weapons with which
> to stage another armed insurrection - and again in 1812 by the second
> country mentioned above (according to our National Anthem, bombs were
> definitely involved in that one...). And, of course, in 1864 half the
> country was not only attacked and bombed but physically invaded by the
> other half (we still bear scars from that one, though they are not as
> prominent as they were when I was young and veterans of that conflict
> were still alive - ancient, but alive and marching in Veterans' Day
> parades).
In addition to the War Between the States (trying to find a title for it which
will be understood outside the U.S. where it is just *the* Civil War), there
have been several instances of armed conflict between the U.S. government and
segments of its citizenry. The history books all mention Shea's Rebellion or
the Whiskey Rebellion, staged by farmers who didn't care to pay certain taxes.
Most of the history books I'm aware of leave out the Battle of Blair Mountain,
in which U.S. troops attacked (and bombed!) a contingent of striking West
Virginia coal miners. I've been told (there are conflicting claims) that the
Battle of Blair Mountain marked the first aerial bombardment of U.S. soil, a
bombardment staged by the U.S. Army Air Force).
Arming against the government has a long, noble, and notably futile history in
this country.
Shez
writes
>In article <8XEidpBZ...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>,
> Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <7fq8qk$5lo$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, virtuo...@hotmail.com
>snip
>> >I met a britcop once, at the sfpd firing range.
>> >He was a bit nonplussed at all the guns everywhere.
>> >He didn't want to carry one himself.
>> >Don't blame him.
>>
>> British cops don't want to carry guns, they realise if they carry guns
>> the criminals will to, the vast majority of criminals don't carry guns,
>> because the penalty especially for shooting a cop is life not 10 to 20,
>> even threatening a cop with a gun or knife has huge penalty's attached.
>
>A penalty is one thing, making sure that the defendant gets that
>penalty is another, esp. here in the usa. Most defendants plea-bargain.
>You just don't have so many guns there, after all. I don't think even
>most of british criminals want guns . .. I heard the horrible story
>about the crime reporter getting gunned down outside her door. I can imagine
>how horrified everyone there is.
Jill Dando, yes she was a very popular reporter, and not simply on
crime, most views are that it was a hit,
We don't have plea bargaining in this country,
I don't think Criminals want guns any more then the police do, if the
police had guns then the criminals would have to carry them as well.
then their would be shoot outs, and innocent people would get hurt, plus
policeman and criminals,
>
>> The police here who go into situations where guns are used, hostages,
>> embassy's and such are specially chosen and trained, cops on the beat
>> don't use guns. We don't want them to, and they don't want to.
>
>After seeing what goes on here, shows a great deal of sense!
>We have specially trained cops that use heavy weaponry, called
>SWAT. They are cops who have special training, but even that
>is no guarantee . .. the reporst coming out of colorado indicate
>that the two guys who started it killed themselves quickly, and
>the cops could have moved in more quickly; they may have been shooting
>in response to other cops' shooting! As my ex boyfriend (sfpd swat dude)
>would say, "what a cluster." Still, how can anyone train for the
>unexpected, and there is nothing you can do to stop a suicidal gunperson
>'cept shoot 'em. You know what's kinda funny, turns out those idiots
>didn't know how to make bombs--they didn't WORK! They wanted to
>take out the whole school; perhaps when they realized they weren't
>Ted Kaczinsky they shot themselves out of pure chagrin.
>snip
Whatever happened it was a mess, its a wonder they didn't blow
themselves up with their bombs, have they actually found any of the
other people they thought were involved. ?
>> >But what I DON'T understand is why the parents of the shooters didn't
>> >do something about their kids when it was obvious they were over the
>> >points, and if *I* had tried to build bombs in our garage, Mom would
>> >have killed me herself.
>> >AND if only those assholeadministrators would stop jockitches
>> >from tormenting outsiders, don't give me that "boys will be boys"
>> >bullshit for their raping girls and gaybashing that they do.
>> >I mean, face it, this was an extroverted suicide, they wanted to die
>> >and take everyone with them. Maybe if the popular kids hadn't been
>> >such assholes . .. .
>> >
>> Are these jocks, sports oriented kids, allowed to get away with so much
>> simply because they have a talent for sport ?,
>
>You betcha.
>However, I took advantage of certain liberties because I was
>on the debate team and got high test scores. I early learned the
>value of ridicule in silencing the assholes, and my way of coping
>was to just ignore them. There's no way for them to respond to
>that.
true, ignoring idiots makes them feel small,
>
>> surely its more important
>> that they have a talent for using their brains, sports is not the reason
>> your going to school, its to be educated,
>> It would be better to spend the money on bright children, to allow them
>> to get ahead, and on children who need more help than the average,
>> Bullying is always a problem but if the school don't take a firm stand
>> on it, then they loose pupils,
>
>I think at last people will pay a little more attention.
I do hope so.
>
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
--
silveroak
silver under the moon wrote in message <7g2pbt$nig$1...@odie.mcleod.net>...
>(SNIP)
>
>>The other point is that there is a legitimate purpose for guns in
>>private hands. If you're a 90 pound woman with a 250 pound male
>>intruder in your home, a 911 call that takes 20 minutes to
>>deliver help isn't a whole lot of help. The only way to handle
>>that problem (unless that woman is a martial arts expert) is with
>>armed help, and the timeframe in that situation means that that
>>woman is the only probable source of that help. If that help
>>doesn't arrive, she's screwed, possibly literally.
>
>
>OH? so there is an alternative to guns and bombs?
>
Knives, swords, crossbows, throwing stars, oh, wait, you meant an
alternative to violence...
silveroak
Baird Stafford wrote in message
<1dqwafb.7m...@tskis2-19.gate.net>...><snip>
>
>> OH? so there is an alternative to guns and bombs?
>
>90-pound woman would still be better off with a gun in her hand.
>
>Blessed be,
>Baird
>
And if you don't like killing people there's always tranq darts...
silveroak
Shez wrote in message <83NiFnB$YkJ3...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>...
>In article <372060de...@news2.infinet.com>, Lee Ann
><g...@infinet.com> writes
>>On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:50:17 CST, Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>
>>wrote:
>>>Is their no laws that such weapons should be in a weapons locker, with
>>>good security....?
>>>Surely people don't keep guns and live ammunition around where their are
>>>children and teenagers who could pick them up and use them ?
>>>Children are curious, and teenagers would think having a gun was big,
>>>and gave them status.
>>>I think your probably right, as an English woman I don't understand, yet
>>>when I was in America, I did not see a gun, apart form at the airport,
>>>or even anyone talking about guns.
>>
>>Different areas in the US have different laws about guns, but, by and
>>large, access and use are pretty unregulated. Every time someone tries
>>to pass any sort of gun control measure, some Americans start pointing
>>at the Second Amendment to our Constitution. ("A well regulated
>>Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of
>>the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.)
>
>A militia is a very different proposition to personal ownership of guns.
>!
Depends... some people have suggested that at the time it was written
the word 'militia' refered to any group of able-bodied men who could be
called upon in times of war. The Federalist papers make it quite clear that
the founding fathers visualized a country with no standing army and with men
of good concience taking up personal weapons to defend her when the need
arose. Looks like that dream has been shot seven ways to sunday.
>I would be worried sick if their were guns in my home, and I had young
>children, unless their is a good security system they will find them ,
>and use them.
> children are always curious, and if Dad and their relatives wonder
>round with guns, and show off, then the children will automatically do
>the same.
I don't have any standard guns in my house (one massive squirt gun- half
a gallon per shot at up to 50 yards!) but I have to say that a gun in the
house, by itself, would not worry me. A gun in the house with standard
amunition pre-loaded would scare me witless.
As a side note- guns don't kill people, bullets do. A paint gun loaded
with lead shots would be dangerous, and a standard gun with rubber or chalk
bullets has a very hard time killing anybody. BB-guns just hurt!
>>
>>As a side note: The National Rifle Association (NRA), possible the
>>largest single opponent to any gun control legislation, is having its
>>national convention in Colorado this week. Despite the tragedy, they
>>refuse to cancel (despite calls to do so from numerous public
>>figures). To give them a little credit, they did cancel a gun show
>>that was supposed to be part of the "festivities".
>>
>>>Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
>>>will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
>>
>>They've been tightening up, but there's a limit to what you can do.
>>Unless they are willing to turn our schools into little prisons,
>>complete with individual, daily searches and locked doors, there will
>>always be a way for kids to get a gun into a school, if they really
>>want to.
>True, and its a frightening thought,
Also it turns out the school was well locked, but the boys had copies of
they keys, which the locksmith didn't think twice about copyin because
teachers ask students to get copies all the time! Physical barriers aren't
going to matter if people don't think about how to apply them.
>Obviously, no caring parent would allow their children to carry guns
>the arguments I have seen that if other children at the school had also
>had guns this would not have happened seems ludicrous.
Actually, some would. I don't agree with them, but they do. The idea
that if other children had guns this wouldn't have happened is actually very
well based- at the very least they wouldn't have killed more than one or two
people before they were cut down by returned fire. Not the best way to
handle things, but certainly an improvement over that particular situation.
silveroak
virtuo...@hotmail.com wrote in message
<7g7cer$bn2$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <8XEidpBZ...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>,
> Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <7fq8qk$5lo$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, virtuo...@hotmail.com
>snip
>> >I met a britcop once, at the sfpd firing range.
>> >He was a bit nonplussed at all the guns everywhere.
>> >He didn't want to carry one himself.
>> >Don't blame him.
>>
>> British cops don't want to carry guns, they realise if they carry guns
>> the criminals will to, the vast majority of criminals don't carry guns,
>> because the penalty especially for shooting a cop is life not 10 to 20,
>> even threatening a cop with a gun or knife has huge penalty's attached.
>
>A penalty is one thing, making sure that the defendant gets that
>penalty is another, esp. here in the usa. Most defendants plea-bargain.
>You just don't have so many guns there, after all. I don't think even
>most of british criminals want guns . .. I heard the horrible story
>about the crime reporter getting gunned down outside her door. I can
imagine
>how horrified everyone there is.
>
It goes beyond that- British police aren't forced into the 'super-hero'
archetype. Look at American police sometimes- they are wearing the bat-man
utility belt, their sirens are designed to inspire terror with flashing red
and blue and the wailing of a predator in the night. Their sidearm are
holstered like a western where any criminal wrestling can grab them more
easily than the officer, and are more on display than for use, they have
shotguns and rifles in the car if they need a real gun. The entire
appearance of a US police officer is designed to inspire flight-or-fight,
and then we act shocked when some people decide to fight (heck, now we act
surprised when they flee to, given the number of deaths in high-speed
chases!)
silveroak
Shez wrote in message <9nRiBgBO...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>...
>Its something I cant imagine quite honestly, but then Britain and
>America are worlds apart when it comes to the social use of guns.
>
>
Funny, I always thought of the use of guns as being rather anti-social.
>Jim Jones ?......
Lunatic religious leader, claimed he was some sort of God and gave his
followers poisined cool-aid to drink after they attacked a senator and news
crew so the FBI wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.
>If someone wants to kill they will find a way, but most people don't
>want to kill, and if their are no weapons handy they usually will not
>kill, the chances are that their opponents might take them apart.
The real irony is that most forms of self defense started from the
inverse premise- weapons were not allowed, so people defended themselves
from government troops with ordinary tools (digging stick, threshing rods
now known as nunchucks, etc.)
silveroak
Gale wrote in message <372769A7...@futuresouth.com>...
It's not that we haven't been bombed, its that we've bombed ourselves
more than anyone else has.
Isn't that what we called Sadam Hussein a criminal for doing?
Gale
> (SNIP)
>
> OH? so there is an alternative to guns and bombs?
I have an excellent alternative, she's called a dog. She alerts the
family; frightens any potential intruders; reminds legitimate and
semi-legitimate callers to "mind their manners"; can not be turned
against us; and appears to love us even more than we love her.
She's not an attack type animal. I recommend, from personal
experience, herding dogs such as border collies, English shepherds,
and the like as family dogs. I know some folks who are similarly
enamoured of retreivers.
The important things in a watch dog are getting the type of animal who
knows when to bark --- not one of those little yappy creatures who
barks at friends and ignores strangers --- and getting a dog
sufficiently physically impressive to convince anyone "casing" the
house that she means business.
Susan Profit
<c.c.sb...@69.killspam.us.com> wrote:
>In article <7g06b9$29q$1...@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net>, Stacey A. Lawless (sala...@mindspring.com) wrote:
>> I know that you meant that in a different light from what I'm about to
>> say, but I'm still glad you said it. Some of my friends and I have been
>> very rattled by the killings in Littleton, because the guys with the guns
>> remind us way too much of ourselves when we were in high school.
Although it is the backside of what I was saying, by saying this you are
admitting to feelings of 'like me' that most folks don't allow themselves
to realize they are thinking. That is actually heading down the path of
getting to know parts of your Shadow, and a thing that will stand you in
good stead in your energy workings. And it was the unspoken part of my
point. Thank you Stacey.
>> Kind of a
>> "there but for the grace of God/dess go I" feeling. Not that we were
>> budding neo-nazis, but high school is sort of like a centrifuge, and all the
>> fringe-type kids get spun together quickly. I remember daydreaming about
>> how much fun it would be to develop some kind of splashy Hollywood mutant
>> power . . . and blow the school to ash and gone with it.
Yep, lots of folks have similar impulses. Not that many will admit to
having them, and when it comes to energy work, there are those who do get
off on the 'power over/revenge' theme. But what can be really
disconcerting is to listen to someone who presents to the community and
themselves not-too-veiled revenge themes in the midst of a 'witch war.'
Ask them about it before hand, ask them about it during, and ask them
about it afterwards and many of them will continue to insist they -never-
do anything like that. And genuinely believe it when they say it because
to believe otherwise is to admit they are not the benign potential
leader/teacher they believe themselves to be. It means they are human,
they have frailties, and they are capable of self-deception.
But because they don't recognize they are doing it (and I have heard so
lu-lu's of rationalizations for saying such things and still keeping up
the self-image) the effects of such energy workings (if they actually do
more than simply speak of it) can catch them by surprise.
You and your friends, by being wiling to admit to yourself you aren't the
perfectly socialized stereotype of a member of this society aren't going
to be caught off guard by such impulses. You know you have them, you just
aren't acting on them.
>Yes, there but for the grace of the Goddes go I.
> Ravan
>Ravan Asteris rasteris / at \ rahul / dot \ net
Agreed, there but for the grace of the Goddess and God go we all,
Ravan. We all just don't admit it to ourselves or to others. There is a
BIG difference between having an impulse and acting on it, and just how
many parents would be happy to have their children hear about every bit of
mischief they got into when they were young? It's been my experience there
aren't that many.
I never played with things that went boom as a child, but some of the
herblore I was checking out would have made my parents take me off meal
preparation chores......... grin. Anyone for a nice bit of catnip/lemon
peel liqueur?
b...@no-spam.com
wrote:
>In article <371F7C2C...@futuresouth.com>, Gale
><ga...@futuresouth.com> writes
>Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
>will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
This seems likely. The detection devices are available, they are used
at airports. I do not see how anyone could object to this.
>
>I do find it very strange, you have no idea how strange, the thought of
>children carrying guns to school is horrifying,
> I gather from one report on the news, that over a million children in
>America take guns to School.
I really doubt that this is correct. It's certainly not allowed or
accepted. Since this incident, someone related one story of a child he
knew who once carried a gun when he was afraid of bullies; that is all
I know of.
In schools in my county, a very nice girl was suspended for having a
knife in her pack. She used it to clean her horse's hoof, and somehow
accidentally carried it to school. I don't know how it was found.
bd
b...@no-spam.com
>C) Most of the weapons present in the Littleton CO. nightmare were not guns
>but explosives made of common materials. Should we ban pipes, gasoline, and
>propane tanks? If disturbed people are going to commits acts of mass
>destruction they will find a way.
If what I've heard is correct, the bombs /didn't work/. They only
thing that worked was the guns.
Some people argue that guns can be made at home too. Seems to me, that
if violence was limited to home-made things (bombs or guns) that
really work, then there would be a lot less successful violence!
(Anyway, it would provide a coolilng off period. Also, as someone
said, if they tried to make something at home, their parents could
catch them.)
bd
b...@no-spam.com
wrote:
>Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
/snip/
>Second Ammendment was, according to my
>history teachers in high school, meant largely to ensure that if another
>tyrrany should grow in future "the people" would have weapons with which
>to stage another armed insurrection
Another school of thought says the 'miliatia' was to protect agaisnt
foreign invasion.
/snip/
>> Bullying is always a problem but if the school don't take a firm stand
>> on it, then they loose pupils,
Only if there are competing schools -- competing for pupils, that is.
Imo this is a good argument in favor of private schools and the
voucher system. If the parents are paying customers, then they would
be able to get something done about bullying, or take their children
elsewhere.
Maybe this would also tend to sort out the different character types,
so that conflicting groups like the jocks/mafia wouldn't have to share
teh same school.
bd
Zephera MorningStar
>silver under the moon wrote:
>
>> (SNIP)
>>
>> OH? so there is an alternative to guns and bombs?
>
>I have an excellent alternative, she's called a dog. She alerts the
>family; frightens any potential intruders; reminds legitimate and
>semi-legitimate callers to "mind their manners"; can not be turned
>against us; and appears to love us even more than we love her.
>
>She's not an attack type animal. I recommend, from personal
>experience, herding dogs such as border collies, English shepherds,
>and the like as family dogs. I know some folks who are similarly
>enamoured of retreivers.
>
>The important things in a watch dog are getting the type of animal who
>knows when to bark --- not one of those little yappy creatures who
>barks at friends and ignores strangers --- and getting a dog
>sufficiently physically impressive to convince anyone "casing" the
>house that she means business.
We have three, "Hounds of Hell" (as one preacher's wife calls them).
They are Doberman Pincher, Great Dane and Mastiff mix. Even though
they are not inside house dogs, They are very loyal, affectionate and
protective. Never once have they ever had to do more than bark and
show their big stupid selves. (Well, I'm just going by the fact that
I have only had to drag a couple of road kill deer carcasses out of
their shed.)
A large dog or so is an excellent deterrent, They are also great
companions and for children, playmates. My Sweeties are part of the
family, that's why they do their job so well. But, a large dog is
not an option some people have. I have been in a situation where
having a dog was not possible. Hey, It would be nice if I could have
Sheba as my guard when I'm walking through a parking lot at night.
She goes with me to the cattle sales. She is well trained and never
leaves my side. But even then I still have a back up tucked in a
holster on me. Cattle is a cash business. No Checks, no credit
cards. Cash money. If I am going to buy cows, I have a lot on me
while I am driving to the sale. If I'm selling cows, I have a lot of
money coming home. Sheba has been an excellent deterrent, but it is
possible she won't be deterrent enough. And I will protect my dog,
she is worth more to me than some low life scum.
Pulls soapbox out of back of pick up, throws it down with a wham and
kicks up some dry Texas dirt. Sets my hat, and steps up.
As for this Black Tuesday thing. All of it is sad. Every detail
about it and the coverage of it, is tragic. But there was not any one
thing, that would have prevented it. It was a long sequence of events
that led to that. It will be a sequence of events that will lead to
the next one, and the one after that. It won't matter how many laws
are passed, or how many other preventive measures are taken. There
will always be tragedy, like these. Is it logical to prevent the
large portion of the population from something, because a few abuse
them? Would you find favor in a law that prevented you from having a
dog as a pet, because a few dog owners abuse their dogs?
What the boys did, was wrong. Nobody noticing something was amiss, is
wrong. People, trying to blame something is wrong. The media making
a circus over it is wrong. That we recognize these wrongs is good.
Sympathy for this tragedy is good. But lets not add to the tragedy by
letting blame be used to banish convenient scapegoats.
Okay... I'm off my soapbox.... Throws soap box back in pickup. Leans
against tail gate and see if there are any replies.
--
ZM*
"love dem lil" mousies
mousies whats I loves to eats
bites dey lil" heads off
nibble on dey tiny feets"
-Kilban
Shez
<ba...@gate.net> writes
>Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> America has never been attacked or bombed, only Pearl harbour, it
>> changes you, and it changes your society. perhaps that is the
>> difference, socially, that Britain was attacked and bombed,
>
>were attacked in 1754 by the French and again in 1776 by a country I
>shan't name just at present -
You mean us Baird. (grin) true, but I was thinking in terms of modern
warfare, within the memory of people alive today, I should have made
myself clearer,
The war between us, was not that long in fact, and most British people
think you had every right to want your freedom, taxes and rule from
another country just don't work especially if that country has a king
who is as mad as a hatter. :)
We don't have any illusions about George, or about the American war of
Independence, nor do we hold any bad feelings about it, I was in fact
suprised to find that some Americans do,
> the Second Ammendment was, according to my
>history teachers in high school, meant largely to ensure that if another
>tyrrany should grow in future "the people" would have weapons with which
>to stage another armed insurrection - and again in 1812 by the second
>country mentioned above (according to our National Anthem, bombs were
>definitely involved in that one...). And, of course, in 1864 half the
>country was not only attacked and bombed but physically invaded by the
>other half (we still bear scars from that one,
Civil war is always a dreadful thing for any country, we had our fair
share of them to. not just the wars of the rose, but the war between two
rulers or would be rulers, in the 11th century Maud and Stephen and
again the parliamentary wars, between the roundheads and the cavaliers,
> though they are not as
>prominent as they were when I was young and veterans of that conflict
>were still alive - ancient, but alive and marching in Veterans' Day
>parades).
Those of your soldiers who have been through such conflicts are changed,
but the people left behind were not attacked, modern America has never
had bombs dropped on them from the air, or lived with the possibility
that tomorrow may be the last day of your life
I do know American friends, who feel the fear of the atom bomb was very
similar, it wasn't, nothing like,
For me, bombs falling were normal, I lived with it, I lost friends
neighbours, and family to that war.
I felt the guilt all survivors feel when those around them are killed
and they live, the fear of having one of those bombs kill my Mother who
worked as a chemist in a huge factory, everything and everyone had
changed at the end of that conflict.
death was something you lived with, when peace came it was very
difficult to believe in it for a long time,
I used to wake up screaming thinking I had heard doodle bugs, or
raiding planes overhead. even now the sound of low aeroplanes will make
me shudder.
>
>I will agree, however, that the wars in which a nation has engaged quite
>definitely shapes its character.
Very much so, the people of this country were a lot less willing to put
up with old traditions and old ways of doing things and a class system
that trapped both women and men into only one strata of life,
It changed a whole generation, for the better I like to think , and it
made women stronger, it was not that long after the war when they got
the vote, the old excuses that women didn't understand , were out of the
window,
>From the war came an understanding that we needed to take better care of
each other while we could, so the health, social services, and education
systems were either put in or improved.
America until then had been a long way ahead in female emancipation.
but after that war, their was no denying women the vote, they had kept
the country running, kept the troops supplied, worked in factory's, in
munitions, on heavy machinery. doing jobs that were once thought
impossible for women to do.
Being part of a war, and its destruction is very different from reading
about it, or seeing it on old newsreels. We lost a whole generation to
that war, you did to, it touched millions, but many of our boys coming
home found their homes gone their family's injured, missing, or dead,
children who didn't know them and who had been brought up by strangers
in areas of the country that were less heavily bombed.
><snip>
>
>> Are these jocks, sports oriented kids, allowed to get away with so much
>> simply because they have a talent for sport ?, surely its more important
>> that they have a talent for using their brains, sports is not the reason
>> your going to school, its to be educated,
>> It would be better to spend the money on bright children, to allow them
>> to get ahead, and on children who need more help than the average,
>> Bullying is always a problem but if the school don't take a firm stand
>> on it, then they loose pupils,
>
>Oh, yes - very Public School, that, that the chaps who are good at games
>are allowed priveleges not permitted to lesser mortals. I think it may
>have more to do with adolescence than with the country in which the
>adolescents reside.
(chuckle) you do have a funny idea of English schools, 98 per cent of
children in this country go to state schools, and sports while
encouraged are not nearly as encouraged as educational excellence,
We have changed to Baird, In this modern world its far more important
that the kids, understand how to use a computer, than a football. their
relay isn't the interest in sport.
>
>Blessed be,
>Baird
silveroak
b...@no-spam.com wrote in message <3728cf97...@news.sonic.net>...
>On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:50:17 CST, Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In article <371F7C2C...@futuresouth.com>, Gale
>><ga...@futuresouth.com> writes
>
>>Yes if you have children it must be very frightening, do you think they
>>will tighten up at schools so that guns are detected ?
>
>This seems likely. The detection devices are available, they are used
>at airports. I do not see how anyone could object to this.
>
>
You mean aside from the groups that believe that metal detectors also
pick up the strips placed in the currency to trace movement of the US money
supply?
silveroak
b...@no-spam.com wrote in message <372adbe4...@news.sonic.net>...
>On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:57:16 CST, ba...@gate.net (Baird Stafford)
>wrote:
>
>>Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>/snip/
>
>>history teachers in high school, meant largely to ensure that if another
>>tyrrany should grow in future "the people" would have weapons with which
>>to stage another armed insurrection
>
>foreign invasion.
>
Which makes a great deal of sense if you haven't read the Federalist
papers which outline the reasoning behind the constitution. In fact, the
founding fathers found the idea of a standing army contrary to the goal of a
free nation!
Stacey A. Lawless
:I never played with things that went boom as a child, but some of the
:herblore I was checking out would have made my parents take me off meal
:preparation chores......... grin. Anyone for a nice bit of catnip/lemon
:peel liqueur?
:
I have to ask (my herblore isn't that good) . . . what would catnip/lemon
peel liqueur *do to the unsuspecting drinker?
Or the suspecting one, for that matter?
BTW, thanks for posting about recognizing/not recognizing one's darker
impulses. I have been trying to find ways to vent mine in harmless and
creative ways lately, and validation--however indirect-- is always nice :)
--Stacey (who *did know where all the pokeweed plants in the yard grew when
she was a troubled adolescent)
Shez
<ti...@eskimo.com> writes
Snip
>Yep, lots of folks have similar impulses. Not that many will admit to
>having them, and when it comes to energy work, there are those who do get
>off on the 'power over/revenge' theme. But what can be really
>disconcerting is to listen to someone who presents to the community and
>themselves not-too-veiled revenge themes in the midst of a 'witch war.'
>Ask them about it before hand, ask them about it during, and ask them
>about it afterwards and many of them will continue to insist they -never-
>do anything like that. And genuinely believe it when they say it because
>to believe otherwise is to admit they are not the benign potential
>leader/teacher they believe themselves to be. It means they are human,
>they have frailties, and they are capable of self-deception.
If your a witch then you have to explore both sides of your nature, and
to be willing to use both sides, you can call them good and bad, or
stability and chaos, we all have both in our natures, no one is all
good, or all bad, it would be foolish to think so.
We all have frailties, we all have those points where we have been
pushed to far,
I long ago realised that if your a witch, your not a goody goody, your a
human being with power, how you use it is up to you.
I have cursed, and I have blessed, you cant have one without the other.
as I remind people occasionally, I never said I was nice. :)
Shez
<silv...@feist.com> writes
>>America are worlds apart when it comes to the social use of guns.
>>
>>
>
Guns are used in social settings, firing ranges, sport, hunting, ect,
not everyone carries a gun to protect themselves surely.
>
>
>>Jim Jones ?......
>
> Lunatic religious leader, claimed he was some sort of God and gave his
>followers poisined cool-aid to drink after they attacked a senator and news
>crew so the FBI wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.
>
>>If someone wants to kill they will find a way, but most people don't
>>want to kill, and if their are no weapons handy they usually will not
>>kill, the chances are that their opponents might take them apart.
>
> The real irony is that most forms of self defense started from the
>inverse premise- weapons were not allowed, so people defended themselves
>from government troops with ordinary tools (digging stick, threshing rods
>now known as nunchucks, etc.)
Basically if you get people mad enough, they will fight back, they did
in France very successfully, and in Russia, not that it turned out that
well.
Soldiers with guns do have an advantage, but those soldiers also have
family's mothers and fathers, children, wives, brothers and sisters,
they are not machines, its suprising how many would in a civil war join
the rebellion, its happened before and it would happen again.
Our own government has been forced to change its mind, not by guns but
by people who marched and put petitions in, who voted against them,
today the ballot box is the best weapon we own.
When the conservative government saw the middle classes who have
always been their supporters turning away from them, then they either
had to change, or they get kicked out. they couldn't change fast enough
so they got kicked out.
If the labour government doesn't watch its manners then the same thing
will happen to them.
Being a very small Island makes it very difficult for the government to
ignore the people, that perhaps is one of the strongest weapons we own.
I know its much more difficult with America, because of the huge amount
of people and the vast areas you cover. that sort of change would take a
long time, its much easier in a small country, where politics and the
weather are favourite topics of conversation
Lori Coulson
: BTW, thanks for posting about recognizing/not recognizing one's darker
: impulses. I have been trying to find ways to vent mine in harmless and
: creative ways lately, and validation--however indirect-- is always nice :)
: --Stacey (who *did know where all the pokeweed plants in the yard grew when
: she was a troubled adolescent)
Stacey, I specialize in growing poisonous plants...at the moment I have:
hellebore, foxgloves, and brugmansia growing. Planning on planting
datura, aconite and pennyroyal later this spring... I've never used them,
but have had neighbors in the past to whom I've considered administering
an attitude adjusting tea....(Not really, 20 seconds of pleasure is _not_
worth 20 years to life....) ;-)
NT,
Brisingamen
--
*****************************************************
...Or do you still wait for me, Dream Giver...
Just around the riverbend? Pocahontas
*****************************************************
Susan Profit
Stacey A. Lawless <sala...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>:I never played with things that went boom as a child, but some of the
>:herblore I was checking out would have made my parents take me off meal
>:preparation chores......... grin. Anyone for a nice bit of catnip/lemon
>:peel liqueur?
>I have to ask (my herblore isn't that good) . . . what would catnip/lemon
>peel liqueur *do to the unsuspecting drinker?
In a family of recovering alcoholics, cause a bit of trouble. For just
about anyone else, it is thought in some sources to be good for supressing
coughs so you can sleep wehn you've got a cold, which isn't a bad thing
sometimes.
I would look longingly at herb recipes for homemade blackberry wines or
Maywine or cognac laced cocolate bon-bons or Gran Marnier sauteed carrots.
Or fennel soup with oxalis, miner's lettuce, fennel, garlic and rosemary
cordial.
>Or the suspecting one, for that matter?
The same herbals that had recipes for making cordials and simples also
generally had recipes for things that were much less benign and my father
would have been certain it was -those- I was looking at. My mother always
remarked on how certain guests she despised never stayed long after being
served coffee. It wasn't until I graduated from college that I told her
about the senna pods. Considering the strong sense of hospitality I was
raised with this was a major no-no, but OTOH it was HER mother who taught
me this one.
>BTW, thanks for posting about recognizing/not recognizing one's darker
>impulses. I have been trying to find ways to vent mine in harmless and
>creative ways lately, and validation--however indirect-- is always nice :)
You and Ravan Asteris both are welcome.
>--Stacey (who *did know where all the pokeweed plants in the yard grew when
>she was a troubled adolescent)
Strangely enough, my father insisted that I not put flowers or herb leaves
in his salads...... he seemed to like the taste of the Eruca, but was very
suspicious of the grape leaves. Muttered something about Ivy and Mah Neigh
Ads.....
b...@no-spam.com
>In article <3729d301...@news.sonic.net>,
> b...@no-spam.com wrote:
>> if violence was limited to home-made things (bombs or guns) that
>> really work, then there would be a lot less successful violence!
>
>Serves those dumbfucks right for cutting chem classes.
>See kids? Stay in class so you can learn how to make bombs
>work better!
>
>> (Anyway, it would provide a coolilng off period. Also, as someone
>> said, if they tried to make something at home, their parents could
>> catch them.)
>
>Uh, that's not what happened.
The guns (ready-made) worked.
The bombs (home-made) didn't.
Researching and making bombs (or home-made guns) that could have worked,
would have taken some time, resulting in a cooling-off period. (And maybe
in getting interested in doing something more constructive.)
bd
b...@no-spam.com
>b...@no-spam.com wrote in message <372adbe4...@news.sonic.net>...
>>Another school of thought says the 'miliatia' was to protect agaisnt
>>foreign invasion.
>>
>
> Which makes a great deal of sense if you haven't read the Federalist
>papers
???
>which outline the reasoning behind the constitution. In fact, the
>founding fathers found the idea of a standing army contrary to the goal of a
>free nation!
Yes. They didn't want a standing army. They wanted each farmer to have his
own musket etc ready to be called in as a militia in the event of foreign
invasion.
bb
bb
bb
bb
bb
bd
hereti...@my-dejanews.com
> >Don't forget Yew the Victorian prisoners favourite and Monks hood. it
> >has a beautiful blue flower, Queen Ann's lace is lethal to.
Hmm. According to John A. Riddle, who wrote -Eve's Herbs- (Harvard University
Press, 1995) the seeds of Queen Anne's Lace were chewed as a contraception,
a folk remedy still used in the Appilachians.
Not sure if it was actually blocking conception of simply caused the uterus
to "flush" but I suppose I COULD do a bit of research.
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> Uh, some people eat the root of domesticated Queen Anne's lace.
> It's called a "carrot".
They are NOT, however, genetically the same plant in the way that dogs
and wolves are genetically the same animal! No part of Queen Anne's
lace is edible, not even the root: all of it is poisonous - at least,
this is true of those varieties which grow wild on North America.
Blessed be,
Baird
trying to make one thing perfectly clear....
--
Modkin for soc.religion.paganism,
Modstaff for alt.religion.wicca.moderated
"We, the Person" <http://newstaffinc.com/person>
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> > Which makes a great deal of sense if you haven't read the Federalist
> >papers
>
> ???
I *hope* the author is not a citizen of the US....
The Federalist Papers were a series of eighty-five essays written by
Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay under the pesudonym of
"Publius" to urge the ratification of the new (then) Constitution, and
published in a New York newspaper. The essays were collected and
printed in book form in 1788 by John and Archibald McLean under the
title _The_Federalist_. They have for years been regarded as the
secondary source of choice by historians and judges trying to decide
what the Framers "meant," primarily because they were written by three
of the principal authors of the document in question.
Blessed be,
Baird
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> The guns (ready-made) worked.
> The bombs (home-made) didn't.
That's odd. I could have sworn that some of the early reports said that
many of the most heavily injured, at least, if none of the fatalities
suffered from wounds caused by nails and the like in the bombs.
> Researching and making bombs (or home-made guns) that could have worked,
> would have taken some time, resulting in a cooling-off period. (And maybe
> in getting interested in doing something more constructive.)
Umm....like what happened in Soho a day or so ago, maybe? No guns
involved there.
Shez
<pci...@otherworld.std.com> writes
>In article <3G6w56As...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>,
>Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In article <7gcp12$6...@acme.freenet.columbus.oh.us>, Lori Coulson
>><lcou...@gcfn.org> writes
>>>
>>>Stacey, I specialize in growing poisonous plants...at the moment I have:
>
>
>>Don't forget Yew the Victorian prisoners favourite and Monks hood. it
>>flowers look like a pretty lazy cap.
>Uh, some people eat the root of domesticated Queen Anne's lace.
>It's called a "carrot".
the Ferny tops of carrots are not Queen Ann's lace, which by the way is
the English folk name for the genus Ammi major
Queens Ann's lace have a spread of white flowers on a long stalk over
three feet tall, the head looks lacy, with a cap of tiny white flowers
Carrot is umbelleferae apiaceae daucus carota. the wild carrot is
sylvestis the cultivated sativus, though the flowers on the outer
umbrils are white the centre one is pinkish. they are only toxic in
massive amounts, when the skin can actually turn orange, due to the
carotene constituent, it produces an alergic reaction to vitamin A. in
other words hypervitaminosis A it would need to be taken in massive
amounts to produce such a reaction.
Umbelleferae means of the carrot family.
Ammi Umbelliferae apiacea visnaga was widely used in India to help
asmatics and the seeds to stop the implantation of ovulated eggs. it is
banned in some countries, it is of the carrot family, Umbelliferae means
of the carrot family.
Ammi majus/ bullwort or bishopsweed also called Queen Ann's lace in
England, because of its lacy cap, of white flowers. causes vomiting,
diarrhoea and migraines, and can cause death through dehydration it is
subject to legal restriction in some countries because of its toxic side
effects. it is not of the carrot family,
Often plant names in different countries can be similar or the same, and
apply to very different plants, possibly you have confused Ammi
Umbelliferae and Ammi Majus.
its easy enough to do, I know I have had to double check often enough.
it took me quite a while to work out that American sage, of the sage
bush variety was not the same as English sage But I am an English
Herbalist, and have only started to get to grips with American herbs.
Their are many odd differences, for instance Earl Grey tea is thought to
be flavoured with Bergamot, folk name Bee Balm. Wild Bergamot Manada
fistulosa is the herb introduced into England.
The American Bergamot native to North America, monada punctata is the
only plant in north America which is a source of Thymol, wonderful for
anyone with colds or a sore throat. plus it relaxes
Earl grey tea is made from the Spanish (Bergamot) orange tree flowers,
which are used in Earl grey. but the tree is not of the Monada family.
Bergamot the herb took its name from the orange tree, not the other way
round.
their are so many herbs with similar or the same name that it can be
confusing.
Walter De La Mare wrote.
Speaketh not whisper not.
here bloweth thyme and bergamot.
softly on thee every hour.
secret herbs their spices shower.
>pci...@otherworld.std.com | "Mundus Vult Decipi"
>Please remove "other" | ("The world wants to be deceived")
>when replying. Thank you. | --James Branch Cabell
Gale
> <b...@no-spam.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > The guns (ready-made) worked.
> > The bombs (home-made) didn't.
>
> That's odd. I could have sworn that some of the early reports said that
> many of the most heavily injured, at least, if none of the fatalities
> suffered from wounds caused by nails and the like in the bombs.
>
> > Researching and making bombs (or home-made guns) that could have worked,
> > would have taken some time, resulting in a cooling-off period. (And maybe
> > in getting interested in doing something more constructive.)
>
> Umm....like what happened in Soho a day or so ago, maybe? No guns
> involved there.
I seem to recall that some 25-30 years ago, when terror was often cold-war
related, plastic explosives were the fashion among bombers.
It seems bombing has become more low-tech -- and more likely to produce hosts
of ugly wounds, if not more fatalities -- in recent years. Nail bombs and other
shrapnel spreaders seem to be the weapons of choice. They're dirty, messy, and
very easy to make. The ingredients are easy to procure and impossible to ban. I
suggest that Western Civilization might find itself all wet if we attempted a
ban on roofing nails.
The physical capacity of stray individuals to kill dozens, or even hundreds,
exists as a by-product of our industrial society. The only answer appears to me
to lie in a change in our moral capacity. Such actions must become
"unthinkable." And such a change in individual consciousness can hardly be
expected while our government is busy dropping bombs on the innocent children
of the mad butchers of Serbia. We seem to know no alternatives to violence --
and I have no suggestions for quick fixes or solutions.
Cheshirehawk
<snip> No, it's to get the dumbfucks out of the way.
> You would not BELIEVE how STUPID some drivers are.
<snip>
there are people who won't get out of the
> way, and the ambulance drivers sometimes say some nasty things on their
> bullhorns. You always hope that the ambulance that the idiot is
> blocking is on its way to rescue a member of the idiot driver's family.
> I mean, how would you feel if someone YOU cared about needed a paramedic,
> or your house was on fire (and they spread faster than you know) or
> if YOU had called 911 because of an armed rapist breaking into your home,
> wouldn't YOU want the cops there fast?
<snip>
No shit. I was IN the ambulance with my one day old infant.. being rushed
to B.C. Children's Hospital.. midday, had to go through downtown Vancouver
to get from one hospital to the other. People were still crossing the
street!!!!! You'd THINK a pedestrian would not want to walk in front of a
moving ambulance with it's siren going... you'd be wrong, though.
My maternal side cared only for my infant.. good thing I wasn't driving the
ambulance... several people would have been mowed down for their stupidity.
He's fine now, btw.. healthy noisy 4 year old.
Blessed Be,
Cheshirehawk
Shez
<pci...@otherworld.std.com> writes
>In article <YpFLCZBT...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>,
>Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>Carrot is umbelleferae apiaceae daucus carota. the wild carrot is
>>sylvestis the cultivated sativus, though the flowers on the outer
>>umbrils are white the centre one is pinkish. they are only toxic in
>>massive amounts, when the skin can actually turn orange, due to the
>>carotene constituent, it produces an alergic reaction to vitamin A. in
>>other words hypervitaminosis A it would need to be taken in massive
>>amounts to produce such a reaction.
>>Umbelleferae means of the carrot family.
>>
>> Ammi Umbelliferae apiacea visnaga was widely used in India to help
>>asmatics and the seeds to stop the implantation of ovulated eggs. it is
>>banned in some countries, it is of the carrot family, Umbelliferae means
>>of the carrot family.
>>
>>Ammi majus/ bullwort or bishopsweed also called Queen Ann's lace in
>>England, because of its lacy cap, of white flowers. causes vomiting,
>>diarrhoea and migraines, and can cause death through dehydration it is
>>subject to legal restriction in some countries because of its toxic side
>>effects. it is not of the carrot family,
>
>match between "Queen Anne's Lace" and domesticated carrots was closest in
>what is now Afghanistan, indicating that that is where the plant was
>domesticated, and that as you got further from there Q.A.L. and carrots
>drifted further apart.
I can only tell you what I know as a herbalist, I am not perfect, but
then neither are botanists. (grin )
I think if you actually use herbs instead of just studying plants
generally, then you do become more knowlagable on the plants you use.
Its possible that Queen Anns lace in America is of the umbelliferea
family, and is the Ammi umbelliferea, but the original common name was
given because an English Queen used to wear lacy caps that looked very
like the flower heads of the Ammi majus they do look quite similar, but
they are not the same,
>> it took me quite a while to work out that American sage, of the sage
>>bush variety was not the same as English sage But I am an English
>>Herbalist, and have only started to get to grips with American herbs.
>
>Though I must now doubt my sources on these things, supposedly an
>American "elk" is really more like a "red deer" on the other side of
>the Atlantic, and what you would call an "elk" we would call a "moose".
>Our "buffalo" are not really buffalo, and no equivalent currently
>exists elsewhere, though there are paintings of them in French caves.
>(Does anyone know if there was an asiatic bison in historical times?)
>Our "antelope" (as in "where the deer and the antelope play") is not even
>remotely an antelope, though of course the guy who called them that
>had never seen a real antelope. As for using "sage"brush as a food
>seasoning, I think I'd rather take my chances with Queen Anne's Lace.
No doubt, I have over the last years been studying American herbs. and I
obviously now know the difference, but as most Americans call it sage,
its difficult to work out they actually mean an entirely different
plant,
English sage is a seasoning. and its very difficult to actually decide
what the plant is in another country, unless you have examined it for
yourself,
obviously I would hardly make the mistake of confusing what is
basically tumbleweed with English sage, but I had never seen the plant,
it might be very familiar to you, but its a whole different herbal to
me.
American herbs are really now only becoming available on the European
markets
I visited America last year, and spent some time in the wilderness,
their were very few plants I recognized, some looked very similar to
those I know in England, but I certainly wouldn't use them, without
either a good herbal and correspondence and checking with an American
herbalist. and double checking with the Royal horticultural society.
Please don't assume because you know your American herbs, that I would
also know them,
You would be as lost in England with our herbs as I was in America.
silveroak
Shez wrote in message <782T3VCd...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>...
>In article <IuLV2.367$8S....@newsfeed.slurp.net>, silveroak
><silv...@feist.com> writes
>>
>>Shez wrote in message <9nRiBgBO...@oldcity.demon.co.uk>...
>>
>>>Its something I cant imagine quite honestly, but then Britain and
>>>America are worlds apart when it comes to the social use of guns.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Funny, I always thought of the use of guns as being rather
anti-social.
>
>Guns are used in social settings, firing ranges, sport, hunting, ect,
>not everyone carries a gun to protect themselves surely.
>Our own government has been forced to change its mind, not by guns but
>by people who marched and put petitions in, who voted against them,
>today the ballot box is the best weapon we own.
> When the conservative government saw the middle classes who have
>always been their supporters turning away from them, then they either
>had to change, or they get kicked out. they couldn't change fast enough
>so they got kicked out.
>If the labour government doesn't watch its manners then the same thing
>will happen to them.
>Being a very small Island makes it very difficult for the government to
>ignore the people, that perhaps is one of the strongest weapons we own.
>
Part of the diference is also the elctoral versus parlimentry system. In
Brittain if the two major parties are ticking people off, they can create a
thrid party and can acquire a degree of power which is proportional to the
number of people they represent. In the electoral colleges, each vote comes
down to a single winner situation, and there is no prize for second or
third. As a result a thrid party which cannot get first in an election has
no chance of growth. A few times in the past one party would fall out of
favor and there would be a frenzy of new parties trying to get into the
other position, but the last 'cultural revolution' resulted in the two major
parties collaberating to supress the third, and ever since 'bipartisanship'
has been a frequent player in keeping out any voices not admitted by the two
major parties. As such, it is becoming a more and more widely held opinion
in the US that if we are going to preserve our freedom, the time will come
when that can only be done by overthrowing the government. A lot of people
feel that ownership of guns will keep that possibility in mind for the
government, and delay the inevitable.
>I know its much more difficult with America, because of the huge amount
>of people and the vast areas you cover. that sort of change would take a
>long time, its much easier in a small country, where politics and the
>weather are favourite topics of conversation
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Shez
Our elections are fun their could be up to 15 parties, obviously the
major labour, conservative, and liberal, but the Miss whiplash party,
the legalise Cannabis party, and the Screaming lord Such party, the
green party the rainbow party, who have flying monks, and much more,
If you don't feel that any of the major parties are worth voting for, or
you object to their policy's, you vote for the smaller ones, in a way
its a slap on the hands to the major parties to tell them they are
getting it wrong, that sort of election is usualy the local council
variety,
people take the national elections more seriously, but their are still a
fair number of votes going to minor parties to remind the big boys they
are not as safe as they think they are.
with local elections coming up soon, I will in fact show my displeasure
with this government by voting for one of the smaller parties, which one
I have not yet decided, a slap on the wrist half way through their
period of government will make them pull their socks up.
Jim Gray
>Our "buffalo" are not really buffalo, and
>no equivalent currently exists elsewhere,
>though there are paintings of them in
>French caves. (Does anyone know if
>there was an asiatic bison in historical
>times?)
As far as I know, there are _still_ Eurasian bison living on the
supercontinent. They're called wisents. Does anyone know if they're
still extant? I seem to remember reading that they were severely
endangered about 10 years ago.
There was also the aurochs, which is much closer to the concept of "cow"
than the concept of "bison." They went extinct in the 1600's. IIRC,
the last stronghold was eastern Europe (Poland, Hungary)
And just as a point of interest, there were actually two different
species of bison on the American continent. The larger Plains species
that still exists and a smaller forest species (now extinct) that
inhabited the Northeast (PA, NY, New England).
Jim
..........................................
The Soapster
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> obviously I would hardly make the mistake of confusing what is
> basically tumbleweed with English sage, but I had never seen the plant,
> it might be very familiar to you, but its a whole different herbal to
> me.
Aaaahhh - no. Tumbleweed and sagebrush are two entirely different
plants.
Tumbleweed (any of various plants but especially an amaranth, Amaranthus
graezicans: I can find no listing of medicinal nor other herbal uses
though a small, niggling memory suggests it is just possible that the
seeds might be edible when ground as grain - but I'd check that before I
tried it!) is an annual. The wind breaks off last year's dead plants at
the base and blows them along, breaking off bits and pieces until the
remainder of the skeleton is practically spherical: the blowing along
bit is the "tumble" part of the name. Its leaves are larger and more
oval than those of sagebrush, and its flowers are generally yellow. It
has no particular odor, when the leaves are crushed or burnt, nor on a
hot day.
Sagebrush (any of several plants of genus Artemisa: herbal usage varies
by species) is a woody shrub. I suppose it's perennial in the same
sense that trees are perennial - but it's much too tough to be broken
off at the base (though the roots can be washed out, of course). The
leaves of sagebrush might be mistaken for connifer needles were they
just a wee bit smaller and sharper. I seem to remember that the flowers
of sagebrush tend towards lavender, though I suspect they may vary
somewhat according to genetics and/or the soil (hah!) in which they're
growing. Sagebrush gets its name because its leaves do have a
distinctly sagey aroma when they are crushed or burnt, on a hot day, or
just after a rain.
<snip>
Shez
<ba...@gate.net> writes
>Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> obviously I would hardly make the mistake of confusing what is
>> basically tumbleweed with English sage, but I had never seen the plant,
>> it might be very familiar to you, but its a whole different herbal to
>> me.
>
>Aaaahhh - no. Tumbleweed and sagebrush are two entirely different
>plants.
brush but was told it was a similar plant to tumbleweed,
I do know its used as a sort of innocence, and the smoke if it, is if
breathed by a pregnant women, can cause a miscarriage,
I know its used in smudging, and in magick that its a purifying herb,
and much used, but I believe their are those who are allergic to its
smoke and that you should not use it indoors,
>Tumbleweed (any of various plants but especially an amaranth, Amaranthus
>graezicans: I can find no listing of medicinal nor other herbal uses
>though a small, niggling memory suggests it is just possible that the
>seeds might be edible when ground as grain - but I'd check that before I
>tried it!) is an annual. The wind breaks off last year's dead plants at
>the base and blows them along, breaking off bits and pieces until the
>remainder of the skeleton is practically spherical: the blowing along
>bit is the "tumble" part of the name. Its leaves are larger and more
>oval than those of sagebrush, and its flowers are generally yellow. It
>has no particular odor, when the leaves are crushed or burnt, nor on a
>hot day.
Interesting, I have only ever seen tumbleweed on films and tv, it always
looks like it belongs in a desert,
I am still learning about American herbs, and waiting for a book that I
have ordered on the herbs of America, which should be interesting.
Must of my knowledge is from modern British books which mention American
herbs and herbal web sites and newsgroups, not the best place .
>
>Sagebrush (any of several plants of genus Artemisa: herbal usage varies
>by species) is a woody shrub. I suppose it's perennial in the same
>sense that trees are perennial - but it's much too tough to be broken
>off at the base (though the roots can be washed out, of course). The
>leaves of sagebrush might be mistaken for connifer needles were they
>just a wee bit smaller and sharper. I seem to remember that the flowers
>of sagebrush tend towards lavender, though I suspect they may vary
>somewhat according to genetics and/or the soil (hah!) in which they're
>growing. Sagebrush gets its name because its leaves do have a
>distinctly sagey aroma when they are crushed or burnt, on a hot day, or
>just after a rain.
>
should I come to America again I will have to find some and bring it
home, I did find some interesting herbs, Kava Kava for instance, and I
am still trying them out on myself, as well as looking up information on
them,
Kava Kava seems to have a similar but more euphoric effect than
valerian,
It should be an interesting herb to work with, its certainly got
relaxing and anti depressive qualities.
Thanks for the info. If its English herbs no problem but your American
herbs are still a learning experience :)
>
>Blessed be,
>Baird
M'Kel
>
> Our elections are fun their could be up to 15 parties, obviously the
> major labour, conservative, and liberal, but the Miss whiplash party,
> the legalise Cannabis party, and the Screaming lord Such party, the
> green party the rainbow party, who have flying monks, and much more,
> If you don't feel that any of the major parties are worth voting for, or
> you object to their policy's, you vote for the smaller ones, in a way
> its a slap on the hands to the major parties to tell them they are
> getting it wrong, that sort of election is usualy the local council
> variety,
> people take the national elections more seriously, but their are still a
> fair number of votes going to minor parties to remind the big boys they
> are not as safe as they think they are.
> with local elections coming up soon, I will in fact show my displeasure
> with this government by voting for one of the smaller parties, which one
> I have not yet decided, a slap on the wrist half way through their
> period of government will make them pull their socks up.
We have the McGillicudy Serious Party who want to return the feudal system
of government and have everybody wear kilts. There policy portfolio is the
simplest, they send out a blank sheet of paper asking for you to fill it in,
I fairly sure they didn't ask for it back. :)
At the last election they almost had enough votes for a seat in parliament,
only another couple of thousand would have done it.
M'Kel
Zephera MorningStar
>Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> obviously I would hardly make the mistake of confusing what is
>> basically tumbleweed with English sage, but I had never seen the plant,
>> it might be very familiar to you, but its a whole different herbal to
>> me.
>
>Aaaahhh - no. Tumbleweed and sagebrush are two entirely different
>plants.
>
>Tumbleweed (any of various plants but especially an amaranth, Amaranthus
>graezicans: I can find no listing of medicinal nor other herbal uses
>though a small, niggling memory suggests it is just possible that the
>seeds might be edible when ground as grain - but I'd check that before I
>tried it!) is an annual. The wind breaks off last year's dead plants at
>the base and blows them along, breaking off bits and pieces until the
>remainder of the skeleton is practically spherical: the blowing along
>bit is the "tumble" part of the name. Its leaves are larger and more
>oval than those of sagebrush, and its flowers are generally yellow. It
>has no particular odor, when the leaves are crushed or burnt, nor on a
>hot day.
Tumble Weeds are not native to America. They were brought over by
Turn of the Century, Russian immigrants in the sacks of grain they
brought with them. As they roll in the wind their seeds break off and
are distributed. They can be a nuisances as they collect along a
fence. I don't know of any grazing animal that will eat them. I
spend a lot of time with a flame thrower burning them from my fence
line.
>
>Sagebrush (any of several plants of genus Artemisa: herbal usage varies
>by species) is a woody shrub. I suppose it's perennial in the same
>sense that trees are perennial - but it's much too tough to be broken
>off at the base (though the roots can be washed out, of course). The
>leaves of sagebrush might be mistaken for connifer needles were they
>just a wee bit smaller and sharper. I seem to remember that the flowers
>of sagebrush tend towards lavender, though I suspect they may vary
>somewhat according to genetics and/or the soil (hah!) in which they're
>growing. Sagebrush gets its name because its leaves do have a
>distinctly sagey aroma when they are crushed or burnt, on a hot day, or
>just after a rain.
It is part of the aroma of the west! I love the smell as it gets
crushed under my horses hooves, while I ride.
>
><snip>
>
>Blessed be,
>Baird
--
Afalwyn
M'Kel wrote in message <7gqqd0$jea$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>...
>
<<snip>>
>
>We have the McGillicudy Serious Party who want to return the feudal system
>of government and have everybody wear kilts. There policy portfolio is the
>simplest, they send out a blank sheet of paper asking for you to fill it
in,
>I fairly sure they didn't ask for it back. :)
>
>At the last election they almost had enough votes for a seat in parliament,
>only another couple of thousand would have done it.
>
>M'Kel
>
My favourite silly party, no longer around,stood in the last GLC elections.
They ran as the Save London Action Group. Any party prepared to use that
acronym, deserved a vote. if only so next time round we could have stood
outside County hall screaming SLAG's out, SLAG's out.
BB
Afalwyn
silveroak
virtuo...@hotmail.com wrote in message
<7gdm91$shg$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <cmLV2.361$8S....@newsfeed.slurp.net>,
> silveroak <silv...@feist.com> wrote:
>snip
>>
>> It goes beyond that- British police aren't forced into the
'super-hero'
>> archetype.
>
>Good point. You just hit on one of my pet theories.
>The sort of person who most wants the job is the one you don't want.
>
>> Look at American police sometimes- they are wearing the bat-man
>> utility belt, their sirens are designed to inspire terror with flashing
red
>> and blue and the wailing of a predator in the night.
>
>No, it's to get the dumbfucks out of the way.
>You would not BELIEVE how STUPID some drivers are.
>with ladders--the other one is an engine). Some idiot drove
>RIGHT INTO THE SIDE OF THE FIRETRUCK, which had lights and sirens
>going, and it had the right of way. Driver said he didn't see
>or hear the truck. BTW, cops don't use the siren that much.
>IN fact, the avoid leaving it on, so suspects can' figure out where
>they are coming from. Fire trucks& engines and ambulances, otoh,
>leave 'em on all the time. there are people who won't get out of the
>way, and the ambulance drivers sometimes say some nasty things on their
>bullhorns. You always hope that the ambulance that the idiot is
>blocking is on its way to rescue a member of the idiot driver's family.
>I mean, how would you feel if someone YOU cared about needed a paramedic,
>or your house was on fire (and they spread faster than you know) or
>if YOU had called 911 because of an armed rapist breaking into your home,
>wouldn't YOU want the cops there fast?
>
>> holstered like a western where any criminal wrestling can grab them more
>> easily than the officer,
>
>Naw. They use different type holsters, and you learn to keep your
>gun away. but it is something you think about.
>
>> and are more on display than for use, they have
>> shotguns and rifles in the car if they need a real gun.
>
>Dear, you are beginning to piss me off.
>The criminals don't have to go find a weapon, and they
>do target cops. You can't use a rifle in the city unless
>you are a trained sniper, and that is not how street cops
>on a beat do business.
>Shotguns are nice, but a pain to shoot and hard to use
>in close quarters.
>
>> The entire
>> appearance of a US police officer is designed to inspire flight-or-fight,
>> and then we act shocked when some people decide to fight (heck, now we
act
>> surprised when they flee to, given the number of deaths in high-speed
>> chases!)
>
>So let the criminals go, so when they hit YOU you can whine about
>how cops let the criminals get away from them.
>And people HAVE sued when cops let criminals get away and they
>later commit other crimes.
>
>Look, I know we need police reform, but copbashing from
>an idiot who doesn't understand the subject is not going
>to do jackshit.
>
First let me say that I have nothing but respect for police-persons,
with a few individual exceptions. Their job is to go out with the tools they
are given and enforce the law. The people I have trouble with are the ones
who are supposed to figure out what equipment and training to give the
officers to best prepare them for this task. Police officers do not choose
their gear, and I suspect that if they were allowed to they would do a much
better job- to begin with the pistol would be *concealed*, and in one of a
few different places so perps wouldn't know where to expect it to be. Next
lace that pepper spray with some form of chemical that induces drowsiness-
people may get ticked off and come back with pepper spray, but when taking a
nap seems like a better option, it would make the job much easier. Instead
of simply using the siren less, the sound and colors should be changed so
they inspire tranquillity instead of anxiety: an anxious criminal is that
much more dangerous, both to the cops and himself.
As for 'let the perpetrators go' no, you don't let them go, but you
don't have to let them know you are following either. Once the helicopter
picks up the fleeing vehicle, back the cars away and let them think they are
safe. Again, raising the stakes works both ways. See what they will do if
they don't think they are being pursued and act accordingly- if they were a
road hazard to begin with remove the danger, if they are trying to get away
with something else (stealing a truck...) keep an eye on them where you
won't force them to make mistakes.
This isn't 'uneducated cop bashing' this is simply going back and
re-evaluating our tactics and looking at whether there is a better way to
accomplish our goals instead of just racketing up the power level on the
methods we already have.
Baird Stafford
<snip>
> Tumble Weeds are not native to America. They were brought over by
> Turn of the Century, Russian immigrants in the sacks of grain they
> brought with them. As they roll in the wind their seeds break off and
> are distributed. They can be a nuisances as they collect along a
> fence. I don't know of any grazing animal that will eat them. I
> spend a lot of time with a flame thrower burning them from my fence
> line.
Ummm....at least one variety of amaranth is, I believe, either native to
the Western hemisphere or brought over and naturalized so long ago that
it might as well be. I believe the seeds of that particular plant have
been discovered during digs at paleo-Indian sites in such situation as
to make it obvious that they were part of the normal diet of those
people.
Which doesn't mean that they *weren't* brought over by Russian
immigrants - just that the time-scale is slightly different....
And, of course, it may be that the seeds that have been found under
those circumstances belong to an entirely different species of amaranth.
<snip>
Blessed be,
Baird
--
Shez
<zeph...@deathsdoor.com> writes
>Baird Stafford wrote:
>
>>Shez <sh...@oldcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>> obviously I would hardly make the mistake of confusing what is
>>> basically tumbleweed with English sage, but I had never seen the plant,
>>> it might be very familiar to you, but its a whole different herbal to
>>> me.
>>
>>Aaaahhh - no. Tumbleweed and sagebrush are two entirely different
>>plants.
>>
>>Tumbleweed (any of various plants but especially an amaranth, Amaranthus
>>graezicans: I can find no listing of medicinal nor other herbal uses
>>though a small, niggling memory suggests it is just possible that the
>>seeds might be edible when ground as grain - but I'd check that before I
>>tried it!) is an annual. The wind breaks off last year's dead plants at
>>the base and blows them along, breaking off bits and pieces until the
>>remainder of the skeleton is practically spherical: the blowing along
>>bit is the "tumble" part of the name. Its leaves are larger and more
>>oval than those of sagebrush, and its flowers are generally yellow. It
>>has no particular odor, when the leaves are crushed or burnt, nor on a
>>hot day.
>
>Turn of the Century, Russian immigrants in the sacks of grain they
>brought with them. As they roll in the wind their seeds break off and
>are distributed. They can be a nuisances as they collect along a
>fence. I don't know of any grazing animal that will eat them. I
>spend a lot of time with a flame thrower burning them from my fence
>line.
Now that I didn't know, they seem so much a part of the old west
somehow, tumbling along deserted towns, and railway lines,
>>
>>Sagebrush (any of several plants of genus Artemisa: herbal usage varies
>>by species) is a woody shrub. I suppose it's perennial in the same
>>sense that trees are perennial - but it's much too tough to be broken
>>off at the base (though the roots can be washed out, of course). The
>>leaves of sagebrush might be mistaken for connifer needles were they
>>just a wee bit smaller and sharper. I seem to remember that the flowers
>>of sagebrush tend towards lavender, though I suspect they may vary
>>somewhat according to genetics and/or the soil (hah!) in which they're
>>growing. Sagebrush gets its name because its leaves do have a
>>distinctly sagey aroma when they are crushed or burnt, on a hot day, or
>>just after a rain.
>
>It is part of the aroma of the west! I love the smell as it gets
>crushed under my horses hooves, while I ride.
Well if it smells like English sage, that is a very penetrating spicy
clean smell.
>
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>Blessed be,
>>Baird
>
>--
>ZM*
>
>"love dem lil" mousies
>mousies whats I loves to eats
>bites dey lil" heads off
>nibble on dey tiny feets"
> -Kilban
>
--
Shez
writes
>
>>
>> Our elections are fun their could be up to 15 parties, obviously the
>> major labour, conservative, and liberal, but the Miss whiplash party,
>> the legalise Cannabis party, and the Screaming lord Such party, the
>> green party the rainbow party, who have flying monks, and much more,
>> If you don't feel that any of the major parties are worth voting for, or
>> you object to their policy's, you vote for the smaller ones, in a way
>> its a slap on the hands to the major parties to tell them they are
>> getting it wrong, that sort of election is usualy the local council
>> variety,
>> people take the national elections more seriously, but their are still a
>> fair number of votes going to minor parties to remind the big boys they
>> are not as safe as they think they are.
>> with local elections coming up soon, I will in fact show my displeasure
>> with this government by voting for one of the smaller parties, which one
>> I have not yet decided, a slap on the wrist half way through their
>> period of government will make them pull their socks up.
>
>
>of government and have everybody wear kilts. There policy portfolio is the
>simplest, they send out a blank sheet of paper asking for you to fill it in,
>I fairly sure they didn't ask for it back. :)
>
>At the last election they almost had enough votes for a seat in parliament,
>only another couple of thousand would have done it.
>
>M'Kel
>
>
Mcgillicudy party.
but in the end I voted liberal on one, and on the second, the legalise
cannabis party. (grin )
My hubby was so disappointed their was no Miss whiplash party this year.
Screaming Lord Such, whose party is the Fun party I think, did actually
get a seat on a council somewhere a year or two ago, when everyone was
trying to tell the government and the opposition they didn't like either
of them. :)
apparently he was re elected, he was a good councillor, and very
ecologically sound, plus he did a lot of work with the unemployed and
the disabled.
Zephera MorningStar
They have very much become part of the west. An onry tough plant.
Burning it seem to be the best way to keep it under control. Some
people do use a defoliant, but I don't use chemicals. The only use I
have found for tumbleweeds is to spray paint some of the dried out
ones, white. Stack them on top of each other with a stake down the
middle. Dress them as a snowman. (my winter effigy)
>>>
>>>Sagebrush (any of several plants of genus Artemisa: herbal usage varies
>>>by species) is a woody shrub. I suppose it's perennial in the same
>>>sense that trees are perennial - but it's much too tough to be broken
>>>off at the base (though the roots can be washed out, of course). The
>>>leaves of sagebrush might be mistaken for connifer needles were they
>>>just a wee bit smaller and sharper. I seem to remember that the flowers
>>>of sagebrush tend towards lavender, though I suspect they may vary
>>>somewhat according to genetics and/or the soil (hah!) in which they're
>>>growing. Sagebrush gets its name because its leaves do have a
>>>distinctly sagey aroma when they are crushed or burnt, on a hot day, or
>>>just after a rain.
>>
>>It is part of the aroma of the west! I love the smell as it gets
>>crushed under my horses hooves, while I ride.
>
>Well if it smells like English sage, that is a very penetrating spicy
>clean smell.
It is very strong. After a day riding, walking and occasionally
having to kneel on it, permeates me. One of the things people notice
when they walk into the mud room, where my work jacket and boots
reside, is the sage. It even out does the smell of cows and horses.
A little bit goes a long way as an air freshener. I like the smell of
sage. Cedar, Sage, Anise, Frankincense, Myrrh, Cinnamon and Vanilla
are the scents I prefer in my home.
Faerie
>Our elections are fun their could be up to 15 parties, obviously the
>major labour, conservative, and liberal, but the Miss whiplash party,
>the legalise Cannabis party, and the Screaming lord Such party, the
>green party the rainbow party, who have flying monks, and much more,
Oh, that makes our elections (we had the national parliament elections
short while ago) seem pretty boring. We just had, among the "age old"
parties only the Party of Natural Law (they had a huge number of
candidates all around the country, they practice "yoga flying" and
said all our problems could be solved if we only had a certain number
of yoga flyers levitating the parliamentary building), the Multicolor
Party (a friend of mine was a candidate of theirs - she said someone
just came over and asked if she would want to run for a seat in the
parliament :-) she said "That I haven't done yet!" and tried. Got 60+
votes, from fellow local Pagans, I guess.), the Repairs Group (don't
ask me), a couple of communist groups who can't get along with each
others (but can with center or right-wing parties, if they are to
benefit), a Christian League, the Basically Finns, the Young Finns
(which is a very old party, well _was_ - they are now removed from the
party registry), League of Free Finland (anti-EU + very right wing),
Pensioners on the Cause of People -party, the Party of Finnish
Pensioners (yep, _two_ pensioner parties).
In the last elections we also had the Party of Common Responsibility,
the Women's Party & Ecological Party (a different group than Greens).
Elections are fun :-) The town representative elections are the most
fun of all, with all kinds of wacky groups trying to get through.
We'll soon have the EU representative elections and the presidential
elections are becoming more and more topical.
With all the differences between my maternal and paternal families,
there's one thing in common - keen interest in politics. I've grown up
among lively and often heated political discussions :-) During our
last presidential elections I had over 20 relatives calling me, trying
to get me on _their_ side. Even my then 7 year old little brother had
very strong opinion on who should win (and boy was he mad when his
candidate lost on the second round). This is something my SO doesn't
quite get, when I know exactly how each and every one of my relatives
vote, he doesn't even know what his parents vote for.
Faerie.
- "Yay, elections!"
--
"I like cats, too.
Let's exchange recipes."
Shez
<zeph...@deathsdoor.com> writes
>
snip
>They have very much become part of the west. An onry tough plant.
>Burning it seem to be the best way to keep it under control. Some
>people do use a defoliant, but I don't use chemicals. The only use I
>have found for tumbleweeds is to spray paint some of the dried out
>ones, white. Stack them on top of each other with a stake down the
>middle. Dress them as a snowman. (my winter effigy)
What a wonderful idea. ,
I would think a defoliant might help when they are growing but be fairly
useless when they reach the tumbling stage.
>
>>>>
>>>>Sagebrush (any of several plants of genus Artemisa: herbal usage varies
>>>>by species) is a woody shrub. I suppose it's perennial in the same
>>>>sense that trees are perennial - but it's much too tough to be broken
>>>>off at the base (though the roots can be washed out, of course). The
>>>>leaves of sagebrush might be mistaken for connifer needles were they
>>>>just a wee bit smaller and sharper. I seem to remember that the flowers
>>>>of sagebrush tend towards lavender, though I suspect they may vary
>>>>somewhat according to genetics and/or the soil (hah!) in which they're
>>>>growing. Sagebrush gets its name because its leaves do have a
>>>>distinctly sagey aroma when they are crushed or burnt, on a hot day, or
>>>>just after a rain.
>>>
>>>It is part of the aroma of the west! I love the smell as it gets
>>>crushed under my horses hooves, while I ride.
>>
>>Well if it smells like English sage, that is a very penetrating spicy
>>clean smell.
>
>It is very strong. After a day riding, walking and occasionally
>having to kneel on it, permeates me. One of the things people notice
>when they walk into the mud room, where my work jacket and boots
>reside, is the sage. It even out does the smell of cows and horses.
>A little bit goes a long way as an air freshener. I like the smell of
>sage. Cedar, Sage, Anise, Frankincense, Myrrh, Cinnamon and Vanilla
>are the scents I prefer in my home.
I like real lavender not the spray stuff, roses, lemon thyme, lemon
balm, rosemary. Night scented stock, nicotina. sage, honeysuckle,
bluebells violets, the scent of an English garden, the ocean, new mown
hay, frankincense strawberry, mango, clover, cinnamon, apple, camomile,
tomatoes, warm bread, and olive oil.
>
>
>--
>ZM*
SMea1958
Orman) writes:
>We've got to stop this cycle of violence. The cycle that says, you took my
>land, I'll kill your children. You made me an outcast, I'll show you.
>You're the bad guy, you're the problem - bang! You're dead! No more
>problem!
>
How I wish parents would teach their children forgiveness rather than
retaliation.
Compromise rather than I'm right you're wrong. I wonder was violence on such a
scale when "Thank You, Please and I'm Sorry" were the norm?
Shannon
http://members.tripod.com/star_lady_2/index.html is temporarily closed, due to
growing pains. Sorry for the inconvience.
silveroak
SMea1958 wrote in message <19990511032843...@ngol04.aol.com>...
>In article <7fm7fn$ik3$1...@the-fly.zip.com.au>, kor...@zipper.zip.com.au
(Kate
>Orman) writes:
>
>>We've got to stop this cycle of violence. The cycle that says, you took my
>>land, I'll kill your children. You made me an outcast, I'll show you.
>>You're the bad guy, you're the problem - bang! You're dead! No more
>>problem!
>>
>
>How I wish parents would teach their children forgiveness rather than
>retaliation.
>Compromise rather than I'm right you're wrong. I wonder was violence on
such a
>scale when "Thank You, Please and I'm Sorry" were the norm?
Depending on exactly when you are talking about, it may well have been
higher. There was a time when people would duel over perceived slights such
as forgetting to say please or thank you, which certainly improved the
manners of people who wished to live a bullet-free life.
Ever since dueling was made illegal, manners have been in a slow decay.
Now we come back to people shooting each other over insults.
Angela Wyatt
>How I wish parents would teach their children forgiveness rather than
>retaliation.
>Compromise rather than I'm right you're wrong. I wonder was violence on such a
>scale when "Thank You, Please and I'm Sorry" were the norm?
>http://members.tripod.com/star_lady_2/index.html is temporarily closed, due to
>growing pains. Sorry for the inconvience.
>
I'm not that old, I can remember when it was possible to actually
disagree with someone and not have it taken as a personal insult.
It's really hard to point to the time when people started getting so
upset if you thought differently, but it seems to have become really
noticable during the 80s.
I don't think it's fair to blame the violence entirely on a lack of
manners, but I think it's part of the trouble. It seems too many kids
today are being raised to be non-functioning citizens. They are
self-centered (more than natural for kids), they have never been
taught responsibility, they have no concept there will be consequences
for their actions, no manners, no respect for others. When they
get out of their nice, sheltered environments, they can't cope.
Angela