Nine slaughtered in the World's Greatest Democracy!

[Romero]

The police chief of  Gulfport, Mississippi, expressed his frustration with his state's open carry laws after a man strolling through a Walmart Sunday night menaced shoppers by loading and racking shells into his shotgun, causing police to dispatch a SWAT team and evacuate the store.



According to Police Chief Leonard Papania, he would have arrested the unidentified man and his companion if he could for stretching the city's police forces thin while panicked Walmart employees huddled in a safe room, WMC reported.



"If I were in a situation where I'm in the store shopping with my family and I see an individual loading a 12 gauge, and racking it, I'm not coming to the conclusion this is good," said Papania. "While the actions of these two men are sanctioned by state laws, what they did negatively impacted our community."



After saying "Our state law allows for this," Papania said, "If there was something I could have arrested these people for, I would,"  before concluding, "Gun laws should be such that it provides us security. As we look at this fact pattern, do you feel safer?"



http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/miss-police-open-carry-laws-kept-us-from-arresting-shotgun-toting-man-who-terrorized-walmart-shoppers/">//http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/miss-police-open-carry-laws-kept-us-from-arresting-shotgun-toting-man-who-terrorized-walmart-shoppers/

I keep hearing about "if only the victims were armed", but you can't do anything unless the bad guys starts shooting and killing you first.



This nutjob is loading his weapon in a Walmart, and people can only hope he's not going to start blasting away.

[Frost]

A. It shall be unlawful for any person to point, hold or brandish any firearm or any air or gas operated weapon or any object similar in appearance, whether capable of being fired or not, in such manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another or hold a firearm or any air or gas operated weapon in a public ...

[Frost]

What will it take for the US to take a serious look at gun reform?  You guys have had some MAJOR shooting incidences that have left big scars on your country and it's citizens.  How bad to things need to get before you acknowledge there might be a problem?

People do acknowledge, but one side wants to be dictators, the other wont give because they are dictators, and hypocrites.



People seem to always want to give freedoms up till it's something they like, or support.



Should we ban doctors ? Of course not, but something needs done about them.



Drugs and Doctors May be the Leading Cause of Death in U.S.

January 15, 2003



By Joseph Mercola, D.O.



At one time, the main title of my Web site read:



Doctors are the Third leading Cause of Death



Many of you reading this have read or seen this in many places other than my Web site. This article, available on my home page, was widely circulated on the Internet and was one of the reasons why my Web site was initially popular. What you may not realize is that I am the one who made this analysis and popularized it. The original study was published by Dr. Starfield, a full professor of public health at the most prestigious hospital in the United States, Johns Hopkins. Her study never had the headline in it, but instead listed the published research documenting the various causes of deaths that doctors contributed to. I simply added them all up and compared them to cardiovascular diseases and cancer and came up with the above headline, which was widely circulated on the Internet.



Interestingly, when I contacted Dr. Starfield by e-mail she disagreed with the headline I had come up with. She did not feel that doctors were the third leading cause of death, but thought they were the number one cause of death because of their failure to inform their patients about the truth of health. Now this might be a bit too harsh as even if people understand health truth they have freedom of choice and can choose to use sugar, soda and drugs (legal and illegal) to compromise their health and longevity.



However, JAMA actually published a study a year earlier that could support that doctors may be the leading cause of death in the United States.



This finding is more of a speculation though, so below I have provided some other studies to support this assertion.



    In 1994, an estimated 2,216,000 (1,721,000 to 2,711,000) hospitalized patients had serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and 106,000 (76,000 to 137,000) had fatal ADRs, making these reactions between the fourth and sixth leading cause of death.



    Fatal ADRs accounted for 0.32 percent (95 percent confidence interval (CI), 0.23 percent to 0.41 percent) of hospitalized patients.



JAMA April 15, 1998;279(15):1200-5



BMC Nephrol. December 22, 2003



    Medication-related problems (MRP) continue to occur at a high rate in ambulatory hemodialysis (HD) patients.



    Medication-dosing problems (33.5 percent), adverse drug reactions (20.7 percent), and an indication that was not currently being treated (13.5 percent) were the most common MRP.



    5,373 medication orders were reviewed and a MRP was identified every 15.2 medication exposures.



Nurs Times. December 9-15, 2003;99(49):24-5.



    In 2002, 16,176 adverse drug reaction reports were received, of which 67 percent related to reactions categorized as 'serious.'



Pharm World Sci. December, 2003;25(6):264-8.



    Medication administration errors (MAEs) were observed in two departments of a hospital for 20 days.



    The medication administration error rate was 14.9 percent. Dose errors were the most frequent (41 percent) errors, followed by wrong time (26 percent) and wrong rate errors. Ten percent of errors were estimated as potentially life-threatening, 26 percent potentially significant and 64 percent potentially minor.



Serious and Fatal Drug Reactions in US Hospitals



    Drug-related morbidity and mortality have been estimated to cost more that $136 billion a year in United States. These estimates are higher than the total cost of cardiovascular care or diabetes care in the United States. A major component of these costs is adverse drug reactions (ADE).



Am J Med August 1, 2000;109(2):122-30



    About 0.05 percent of all hospital admissions were certainly or probably drug-related.



    Incidence figures based on death certificates only may seriously underestimate the true incidence of fatal adverse drug reactions.



Eur J Clin Pharmacol October, 2002;58(7):479-82



    In one study of 200 patients, ADRs may have contributed to the deaths of two (one percent) patients.



J Clin Pharm Ther October, 2000;25(5):355-61



    In a survey of over 28,000 patients, ADRs were considered to be the cause of 3.4 percent of hospital admissions. Of these, 187 ADRs were coded as severe. Gastrointestinal complaints (19 percent) represented the most common events, followed by metabolic and hemorrhagic complications (nine percent). The drugs most frequently responsible for these ADRs were diuretics, calcium channel blockers, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and digoxin.



J Am Geriatr Soc December, 2002;50(12):1962-8

[Frost]

.

Not worth it.

Chime in Kiebers, our opinions mean nothing anyhow :) all are welcome.

I get you though,  

[Bricktop]

.

Not worth it.

Nah.



Just keep killing 30,000 of your neighbours, friends, cousins, brothers, sisters and total strangers a year.



Who gives a fuck.



As long as you have a nice Smith and Wesson .357 tucked under your pillow, YOU'RE safe.



Of course, its hard to take your country seriously when you bang on about justice, liberty, human rights and freedoms...but who cares.



Its not worth it.

[cc]

ummm  20,000 of those were suicides



Please rephrase

Just keep killing 30,000 of your neighbours, friends, cousins, brothers, sisters and total strangers a year.

for your own credibility  .. before anyone see it



You are welcome

[RW]

Blue, I'm sorry but I'm not going to buy into the change in argument.  We aren't talking about doctors.  We are talking about GUNS.



It really sounds like your "freedoms" aka gun ownership infringes on the general security of persons in the US.



See we have guns in Canada a lot of them per capita.  We are told how to store them, transport them, and where and when we can discharge them.  Our citizens have no problem not carrying concealed weapons nor is there a big issue with the types of guns we can have.  We have background checks as well and certain people cannot be issued firearms as well as a waiting period.  Why is it such a big problem to have similar restrictions in the U.S.?

[Bricktop]

ummm  20,000 of those were suicides



Please rephrase

Just keep killing 30,000 of your neighbours, friends, cousins, brothers, sisters and total strangers a year.

for your own credibility  .. before anyone see it



You are welcome

And that MATTERS???



Seriously...what is wrong with you people, that you think its OK for 20,000 people to cap themselves each year??

[RW]

ummm  20,000 of those were suicides



Please rephrase

Just keep killing 30,000 of your neighbours, friends, cousins, brothers, sisters and total strangers a year.

for your own credibility  .. before anyone see it



You are welcome

In 2013 cc, 876 American kids aged 10-18 took their own lives with a gun.  Does that number sit okay with you?



Are 20,000 dead Americans any less dead if they shot themselves?

[Renee]

Blue, I'm sorry but I'm not going to buy into the change in argument.  We aren't talking about doctors.  We are talking about GUNS.



It really sounds like your "freedoms" aka gun ownership infringes on the general security of persons in the US.



See we have guns in Canada a lot of them per capita.  We are told how to store them, transport them, and where and when we can discharge them.  Our citizens have no problem not carrying concealed weapons nor is there a big issue with the types of guns we can have.  We have background checks as well and certain people cannot be issued firearms as well as a waiting period.  Why is it such a big problem to have similar restrictions in the U.S.?

I think I've explained that to you before we have all those same legal provisions in place in the US and in fact in most of our major cities and more liberal states our gun laws are probably more restrictive than yours. But once again they will only be adhered to by those that will abide by them.

[RW]

So what's the rest of your country waiting for?

[Renee]

So what's the rest of your country waiting for?

Maybe when these restrictive gun laws start working someone will take notice. Until then it all smoke and mirrors. Just so you know, Connecticut where the Newtown massacre took place has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Those restrictive laws didn't prevent 20 kids and 6 adults from getting killed, now did they?



BTW, I'm working on a portrait of your boyfriend I will post it in the art forum when I am satisfied with it. Creative juices are flowing.  

[RW]

I did a portrait of him myself once.  I don't feel it's good enough to post though.

[Bricktop]

Watch your step, toots...I am a maestro of Photoshop...



You might wanna put a stopper on those juices.



As to "restrictive" gun laws, that is pure bullshit. There is only ONE restrictive gun law, and that is NO FUCKING GUNS. Putting restrictions on gun ownership in a country where a man buys a high powered handgun for his son on his 21st birthday is closing the gate long after the horse has disappeared over the horizon. There is NO justification for private gun ownership. Not one rational, reasonable, sensible, logical and humane argument.

[RW]

So what's the rest of your country waiting for?

Maybe when these restrictive gun laws start working someone will take notice. Until then it all smoke and mirrors. Just so you know, Connecticut where the Newtown massacre took place has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Those restrictive laws didn't prevent 20 kids and 6 adults from getting killed, now did they?:

What good is an island of restriction in a sea of free for all?