Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Sometimes, an "F" is a good thing...

  1. #1
    Regular Member HeesBonafide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    152

    Post imported post

    Somehow, I knew that the my findings would end up this way. I have a habit of looking at logic instead of politics or emotions when looking at the data.

    Every so often, I check out Brady's site and it came out with a "report card" for states. I checked out Washington State and we came in an abyssmal "1 star" and a lowly score of only 17 points!-- basically an "F" if you grade on a curve. In fact, it wa so bad, that we were not even rated against our other 49 other states : http://tinyurl.com/BradyWA

    I then thought I would see if I could find the number 1 rated state on their site, and did a little searching and found that beautiful California has received the dubious honor of being Brady's star student and received a "4 Stars!" rating with 79 out of 100 points and their NUMBER ONE rate state. http://tinyurl.com/BradyCA

    So, I thought to myself. Does this mean what I think it means? That California actually is doing something "to prevent gun violence" as the Brady's Tag Line would say?

    So, I asked google for gun crime by state and came up with the following: http://tinyurl.com/StGunCrime. Something has to be wrong, because their star student (while not as bad as the worst place: Wash DC) they were listed at #30. Not too badwhen you lookat itall on it's own-- they are in the bottom half ofstates, so they can't be that bad. HORRIBLE if they are considered their star student and even worse when you compare them to our own state (not even rated student of 17 points and only 1 star) listedat 35.

    I guess Iwould rather receive an F grade and have lessguncrime, thanget an AGrade with more gun crime.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran ak56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Carnation, Washington, USA
    Posts
    748

    Post imported post

    We still have a ways to go with that 17 score... Utah got a perfect 0.
    No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded, by the common law than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law. Union Pacific Rail Co. vs Botsford as quoted in Terry v Ohio.


    Talk to your cats about catnip - before it's too late.

  3. #3
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    ak56 wrote:
    We still have a ways to go with that 17 score... Utah got a perfect 0.
    O Man!

    Why couldn't they grade on a curve? I'm sure we could have gotten a lower score on the curve!

    Edit:

    But congrats to Utah! Way to go!

  4. #4
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522

    Post imported post

    I saw it too. I troll their website to see what their opinionated, one sided view for the day is also. What do we need to do to get our score to a perfect "0" also? We cant let Utah beat us.
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lewis County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    226

    Post imported post

    ak56 wrote:
    We still have a ways to go with that 17 score... Utah got a perfect 0.
    Ahahahahahaahaha! <3

    I don't like being OT but I have just discovered why my county is so completely screwed: Chris. Also I believe we have just confirmed sv'ssuspicions.

    I'm serious. I just read tonight's Chronicle and the way a normal person skips around to headlines when they read it would make a sane rational person want to move the hell out. Let me give you my new found example starting from the middle of Adam Pearson's health article:

    In a press release issued by the public health department, health officer Rachel Wood said the county scored 35th of 39 in health behaviors: tobacco use, alcohol use, diet, exercise and high risk sexual behaviors.

    High risk sexual behaviors? I'll let you interpret that any damn way you want. I know what everyone else here is thinking though.

    It gets better:

    Each resident has the power to pick one behavior - no matter how small -- to change with the intent of improving their own health. For example, choosing to drink water<snip>

    It ends right there before telling you the rest is on the back page. Though you won't want to read the rest of it because the second you glance down from the article you see a big @#$%ing header that says Gregoire Proposes New Taxes on Soda, Water, Candy.

    Who puts a tax on water? A free resource that depending on where you livecould bemore abundantthan stupid women? I think it's time to retreat to a better state like Oregon. Not even AlPacino would put up with this. I bet the women are better there too.

  6. #6
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    DaemonForce wrote:
    Who puts a tax on water? A free resource that depending on where you livecould bemore abundantthan stupid women? I think it's time to retreat to a better state like Oregon. Not even AlPacino would put up with this. I bet the women are better there too.
    Umm....

    That would be BOTTLED water as is sold by corporations like Coka Cola or Pepsi, not municipal water or water sold by metric weight, such as is purchased for a cistern.

    Perhaps you should have gritted your teeth and read the whole thing, or, done a bit more research.

    Edited for clarity and punctuation.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lewis County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    226

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    Umm....

    That would be BOTTLED water as is sold by company's like coka cola, not municipal water.
    I realize that. It's just how everything is organized in tonight's paper makes me feel like burning away any shred of faith I had left in people. Watching CNN will do that too.

    Also, I still have values for myself. I don't pay for sex or water. If you manage tofind sex in a bottle, you got what you paid for. If you pay for bottled water, you're getting a golf club up your ass(or equivalent health effect). Last time I checked(which is never), there's a lot of crap in bottled water. Stuff you don't need in your system. Do not want.

    If I go for a new permit or license, I pay the taxes and I get what I paid for. If I pay for water, I'm being extorted.

    Edited for lack of perpetual energy.

  8. #8
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    DaemonForce wrote:
    FMCDH wrote:
    Umm....

    That would be BOTTLED water as is sold by company's like coka cola, not municipal water.
    I realize that. It's just how everything is organized in tonight's paper makes me feel like burning away any shred of faith I had left in people. Watching CNN will do that too.

    Also, I still have values for myself. I don't pay for sex or water. If you manage tofind sex in a bottle, you got what you paid for. If you pay for bottled water, you're getting a golf club up your ass(or equivalent health effect). Last time I checked(which is never), there's a lot of crap in bottled water. Stuff you don't need in your system. Do not want.
    O, I totally agree.

    We long ago stopped buying bottled water and started using a good filtration system at the kitchen tap. Talk about saving money and such better water quality that would make the aforementioned corporations quake with fear if everyone used such systems.

    Of course, not all municipal water needs filtering, but ours just happens to.

    Edit: Ok, back to the OT.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lewis County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    226

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    kitchen tap
    If you had any idea of our recent water systemhistory...

    Yeah. It's not good either. Almost as bad as this Brady effect. Speaking of which, the gun related crimes are usually violent ones, right? In that case it's not a matter of what do we do but what does that mean? What exactly is the real goal of this Brady campaign?

    I just recognized thegeneral concensus on this topic. Utah and Arizona are man lands. Probably a good reason I've been in them. Utah has a perfect 0. That's awesome. They don't have laws to control guns but they don't have laws to control gun traffic. Maybe they realize the ordeal or they're the ringleader behind the whole gun mess. Either way, I'd have to say Utah residents really are enlightened people. =/

  10. #10
    Regular Member HeesBonafide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    152

    Post imported post

    You mean Utah got a ZERO?! They must have a HUGE gun violance problem!! Surely can't be better than Cali......uh, wait.......oh, nevermind..

  11. #11
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812

    Post imported post

    Interesting info there... I'd have thought New Hampshire would have been the lowest. Surprised WA got such a high score actually.

    Although now I have a painfully strong urge to wipe my hard drive, disassemble & sterilize my computer piece-by-piece for having exposed it to such unabashed & repugnant online filth as the brady bunch's website.

    Think I'll go shower again too.
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran Bookman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    1,424

    Post imported post

    Metalhead47 wrote:
    Interesting info there... I'd have thought New Hampshire would have been the lowest. Surprised WA got such a high score actually.

    Although now I have a painfully strong urge to wipe my hard drive, disassemble & sterilize my computer piece-by-piece for having exposed it to such unabashed & repugnant online filth as the brady bunch's website.

    Think I'll go shower again too.
    That's why I only use the computer at work when I want to check their website.
    "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


    "I like people who stand on the Constitution... unless they're using it to wipe their feet." - Jon E Hutcherson

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    286

    Post imported post

    "2 feature test on assault pistols only"
    ~WA report card

    I have to ask, what the heck is an assault pistol? I've never even heard the term before. Is Brady making up new phrases again.....?

    Next thing you know, they'll try banning all handguns with sights on them since it makes them "too" accurate.
    DISCLAIMER: This post may contain libertarian ideas and language that are consistent with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, including a belief in liberty, rule of law, and natural rights. It may also contain opinions critical of government and the tyrannies being committed by such. If you are an authoritarian, statist, or other freedom hater, side effects of reading this post may include high blood pressure, loose stool, severe genital itching, and diarrhea of the mouth.

  14. #14
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    kenshin wrote:
    "2 feature test on assault pistols only"
    ~WA report card

    I have to ask, what the heck is an assault pistol? I've never even heard the term before. Is Brady making up new phrases again.....?

    Next thing you know, they'll try banning all handguns with sights on them since it makes them "too" accurate.
    O, they would do it if they thought they could use the angle successfully.

    Heck, in California, they may just! :?

  15. #15
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    kenshin wrote:
    "2 feature test on assault pistols only"
    ~WA report card

    I have to ask, what the heck is an assault pistol? I've never even heard the term before. Is Brady making up new phrases again.....?

    Next thing you know, they'll try banning all handguns with sights on them since it makes them "too" accurate.
    O, they would do it if they thought they could use the angle successfully.

    Heck, in California, they may just! :?
    LOL yep they'll ban ones with sites because it's too accurate and then they ban the ones without sites because innocent bystanders could be hit.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327

    Post imported post

    I was feeling pretty proud about that '17' score, until I looked at their map and saw the sea of red. Yep, 25 states have even lower scores than we do! What's up with that???

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769

    Post imported post

    Sometimes being an "under achiever" could be good.

  18. #18
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    amzbrady wrote:
    I saw it too. I troll their website to see what their opinionated, one sided view for the day is also. What do we need to do to get our score to a perfect "0" also? We cant let Utah beat us.
    If we make "campus-carry" legal, we'd get a perfect 0 also.

  19. #19
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    shad0wfax wrote:
    amzbrady wrote:
    I saw it too. I troll their website to see what their opinionated, one sided view for the day is also. What do we need to do to get our score to a perfect "0" also? We cant let Utah beat us.
    If we make "campus-carry" legal, we'd get a perfect 0 also.
    You mean preempting a university's ability to punish staff or students who carry on university property, right?

    Its already "legal" as far as state law is concerned for people to carry.

    The major hiccup being that the state has given publicly funded universities the ability to trespass as if they are private property.

    Edited to add an n....doh

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lewis County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    226

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    You mean preempting a university's ability to punish staff or students who carry on university property, right?

    Its already "legal" as far as state law is concerned for people to carry.

    The major hiccup being that the state has give publicly funded universities the ability to trespass as if they are private property.
    They shouldn't have to do that. There should be armed guards in there to protect students. I'd like to see students open carry on campus but it's likely a few certain people would just cause problems and ruin it for everyone. The alternative is a secured access environment.

  21. #21
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    DaemonForce wrote:
    They shouldn't have to do that. There should be armed guards in there to protect students. I'd like to see students open carry on campus but it's likely a few certain people would just cause problems and ruin it for everyone. The alternative is a secured access environment.
    Which is not possible for a university campus, and not the governments responsibility.

    You have to have access control points to make a secured access environment, and short of a few tech and community collages, it would be logistically impossible.

    Places of learning are suppose to be environments of learning, an intermediary community that teaches and prepares people for the real word they are soon to be entering. Not locked down micro prisons that teach people to cover their eyes and ears and chant "there is no evil, and I am not responsible for protecting myself".

    And there are ALREADY armed guards on campuses, but as with the real world, they cant be everywhere at once, and when seconds count....well, we all know the rest.



  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lewis County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    226

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    And there are ALREADY armed guards on campuses, but as with the real world, they cant be everywhere at once, and when seconds count....well, we all know the rest.
    All true but this in particular worries me. Conceal carry doesn't do anyone any good. I don't know anyone that furtively carries more than one weapon. Students should have the right to defend themselves without worry of legal limbo or being kicked off of campus for exercising their rights. Someone freaking out about a gun every other day doesn't help either. It's good to hear about the armed guards thing too since I haven't been in school in a really long time. When I was going to college there would be two guards across a 3/4 mile sized campus. Just a small school but there were only two guards and they didn't carry. I guess you can think of them like a mall ninja in training. The only bad part about this is that it doesn't protect anyone. I guess the next step is to increase the number of guards.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812

    Post imported post

    DaemonForce wrote:
    FMCDH wrote:
    You mean preempting a university's ability to punish staff or students who carry on university property, right?

    Its already "legal" as far as state law is concerned for people to carry.

    The major hiccup being that the state has give publicly funded universities the ability to trespass as if they are private property.
    They shouldn't have to do that. There should be armed guards in there to protect students. I'd like to see students open carry on campus but it's likely a few certain people would just cause problems and ruin it for everyone. The alternative is a secured access environment.
    Oh you mean like a military base? With big electric fences & armed MP's, and only authorized people can get thru the gate? Worked real good at Ft. Hood....
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  24. #24
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    You mean preempting a university's ability to punish staff or students who carry on university property, right?

    Its already "legal" as far as state law is concerned for people to carry.

    The major hiccup being that the state has given publicly funded universities the ability to trespass as if they are private property.

    Edited to add an n....doh
    Yes, I was referring to the Utah statute that specifically allows for students to carry concealed on University campuses in the state. I'm aware of what is "legal" in WA and what the WACs allow the universities to do in terms of trespass and student discipline. I am also frustrated by it. If we had a RCW specifically protecting our state constitutional right to be armed to defend ourselves without impairment on college campuses I would be happier. We shouldn't need that RCW, but we do because of the way law is being practiced and enforced in this country.


    DaemonForce wrote:
    [SNIP] Conceal carry doesn't do anyone any good. I don't know anyone that furtively carries more than one weapon. [SNIP]
    I realize this is the open carry forums, however, I disagree with your hyperbole. Concealed carry does do plenty of good. How many university shootings has Utah had since they protected concealed carry by statute? Furthermore, what is the national trend in violent crime as the "right to carry" laws are passed in the various states vs the states without "right to carry" laws? Utah hasn't had any college shootings since their laws protecting campus carry were passed. Read Lott and you'll find that there is an inversely proportional relationship between violent crime and right to carry states/areas; as carry permit numbers increase, violent crime decreases. Read "The Armed Citizen" reports in any NRA publication each month... I think it's rather elementary to conclude that "concealed carry does plenty of people plenty of good."

    I open carry often. I concealed carry just as often, if not more often. In fact, I am rarely without 2 or more weapons. I don't like the idea of open-carrying without a concealed backup and I don't always open-carry. I know many people who carry more than one weapon on them. In fact, most of the people I associate with from this board carry more than one firearm regularly and lawfully.

    However, you used the word "furtively" which has an entirely different legal implication. None of the people I associate with carry "furtively" but I "know of" the existence of many people who do carry more than one weapon furtively; gang members. I don't know them personally and I don't associate with them, but it's a sure bet that gang members are furtively carrying more than one weapon... There's an old police adage; where there's one, there's more. This didn't come about because criminals were only furtively carrying one weapon; it's because they frequently have more than one. Concealed carry is doing them plenty of "good" too; it's unlawful behavior to support their criminal enterprise, but it's still doing them "good" in terms of their income and their survival.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lewis County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    226

    Post imported post

    Metalhead47 wrote:
    Oh you mean like a military base? With big electric fences & armed MP's, and only authorized people can get thru the gate? Worked real good at Ft. Hood....
    I've thought about it but that seems like a bad idea. I guess what I'm thinking of classifies as a "sterile" area. Oh God...Bad memory. A select group of individuals have proven to me that even if you ban metal in an environment, you still run the risk of allowing dangerous weapons through. This is why there's no such thing as security. There's no safety net for preventing danger. Period.

    shad0wfax wrote:
    In fact, I am rarely without 2 or more weapons. I don't like the idea of open-carrying without a concealed backup and I don't always open-carry.
    Thank you. You have defined my active view on concealed carry. This place must be getting to me because my language is getting weird. Sorry forany confusion. The last time I checked I live in Washington State. As much as I would like the effectiveness of firearms to mirror Utah's ideals, it pains me knowing their laws and common sense don't extend to Washington and the people herein.

    Fake Edit: I still need lunch.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •