House of Reps. member Giffords shot in Arizona today

Perhaps one of the real issues here is why was Loughner not being scrutinized and watched more intently by law enforcement? Why weren't those questions being asked right away instead of authorities, including the sheriff, trying to throw the blame on somebody else? One of the questions I would like to see asked is why was Loughner with his obviously questionable track record allowed to attend the event in the first place?

I guess all kinds of questions are coming to mind. Wouldn't it be logical to have a signing in process, with presentation of I.D., and that sort of thing, to enter a political event like that? It appears to me that somebody dropped the ball big time.

I think I'd be deeply hurt to have a loved one killed and have everyone talk about the topic but omit their name.

Perhaps one of the real issues here is why was Loughner not being scrutinized and watched more intently by law enforcement?

Wouldn't it be logical to have a signing in process, with presentation of I.D., and that sort of thing, to enter a political event like that?

I'm defending my position, nothing more.
The example you gave using the "full of ****" statement, was not end example of anything other then your own thought process.
If however, you think that "proves" that I am dishonest, then that's fine. You are welcome to you'd opinion.
However, it only proves it to you.

But if it makes you feel better and if its that important to you, then I will say I was wrong and offer my most humble apologies and beg for your forgiveness.
Does that make you feel better?

Good points, cyclops. I asked those questions because I admit to not knowing how those kinds of things are handled. I am asking these questions because I have read there is a record of the police being called to the Loughner residence, and perhaps some questionable stuff going on where he went to school. I think it is proper to ask how this could have been prevented, similar to the way all of us asked how 9/11 could have been prevented. I know that is a totally different scale, but I think we ask those questions after any crime.

I don't believe that anyone is so perfect as to have never uttered a comment either in jest or anger that they wouldn't want an unstable person to act on. To a friend? To their spouse? Muttered under their breath? I guess what I wonder is, since you admit you did in an imperfect moment many years ago, why are you bent out of shape about it?

You are entitled to your opinion. Don't let mine bother you so much.

I got no problem with a simple difference of opinions. Yours or anyone else's.

Probably some in Tucson for that matter. The police have a big job and only so much time and money.

The Tucson Police Department will be tightening its already overloaded belt in the wake of the of the recent election results.


Tucson police/Ryn Gargulinski
But we saw that coming.

A majority 62 percent voted no to Proposition 400, which would have led to a one-half cent increase in Tucson city sales tax to help fund “core” services – things like firefighters and cops.

Please try not to start any blazes or create any mayhem or traffic crashes during these tough times.

While Tucson Police Chief Roberto Villaseñor promised no layoffs of commissioned personnel in his Nov. 3 memo to City Manager Mike Letcher, he did note other reductions in service that will kick in Dec. 5.

These reductions are hitting when the Tucson police force is already at nearly the lowest it has been in the past 10 years – with 145 fewer sworn members than a mere two years ago.

Welcome to the new Tucson.

On the flipside, frustration is through the roof.

“There has been a palpable increase in the use of psychological services by all members of the department, both sworn and non-sworn,” Villaseñor wrote in the memo.

“Feedback from a wide cross-section of employees over the past several months through our internal audit process has increasingly pointed toward frustration of being asked to do more with less, and simply being unable to meet the expectations of the public due to decreased staffing.”

Welcome to the new America

The sad truth is there is no way to keep guns out of the hands
of people that really want one.

You can buy one on the street if you know where to go.

And an asshole in a bar is gonna be an asshole, and there really is no way to prevent it.

If someone is looking for a fight in a bar, or anywhere else,
then They will use whatever is handy as a weapon.

While I am a firm believer in the 2nd amendment,
I also believe in enforcing the gun laws regarding background checks.

While that wont catch all of the crazies out there, is does catch many of them.

I do believe that if someone does carry a gun,
they should have some safety training and have to attend a class on gun safety.

I carry a gun here at work, as part of my job.
Not only did I have to get my state concealed carry permit,
I had to pass a gun safety course thru the company also.

Most propel[?], IN MY OPINION, that carry will never have to use one
against another person, and to be honest I don't think most people
could handle shooting someone.
I know I still have nightmares about it when I shot a man in Iraq.

However, my personal opinion about guns
is that I would rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it.

SO, heres a deal. Im gonna thumb this thread down until, with enough other thums down, itll disappear up someones anal sphincter.

Quote:

SO, heres a deal. Im gonna thumb this thread down until, with enough other thums down, itll disappear up someones anal sphincter.

Count me out on that. It is an excellent thread. It fulfills the criteria of resistance analysis.

Have you seen the film of the cops in Tunisia throwing a cordon around a large store and then looting it themselves?

Leaving out the personal tragedies--it's show-biz. And personal tragedies are nothing special.