caughtinthemiddle (Greg Cooper)


Comment history

'Guns are not worth more than children’s lives': One month after Florida massacre, students in Lawrence join national walkout

What, because the NRA's gun ideology is more important than People's lives and safety? That ideology? Come on, Bob, you can do better than that. I hope.

March 15, 2018 at 7:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

'Guns are not worth more than children’s lives': One month after Florida massacre, students in Lawrence join national walkout

I understand, Brock, and I hope you've found my posts to be reasonable. But, and I truly believe this, those who are not acquainted with the various definitions are not, in my mind, to be put down. You and I know the definitions, and we can argue civilly about the actual issue, which is some sort of gun control. But to those who are not, so what? Their argument about guns may be based more on the results of gun violence than the types of guns used. So what? All you can do is respond to the base argument, which, in my mind, is how do we reduce gun violence. Forget about educating those who don't want to know, because they, yeah, don't want to know. But, and this is the basic argument, there is too much gun violence that has not been studied and addressed enough by those who DO know the definitions.

Try, for a while, to forget about educating people about the difference between a pistol and a bazooka. Try, as I have, to come to a common ground. "Do you want "assault weapons" banned or do you want to find a way to reduce GUN violence? To them, it will always be the same. To you, it's not, but the underlying fear, that of death and maiming by gunfire, can and must be addressed. Be the big guy and go with that. All else will fall in line.

March 15, 2018 at 7:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

'Guns are not worth more than children’s lives': One month after Florida massacre, students in Lawrence join national walkout

Brock, it really makes no difference, now, does it? A weapon that is designed to fire a large number of rounds in a short time is an assault weapon, by any but the narrowest of definitions. Semi-automatics can shoot a great number of lethal or potentially lethal bullets in an incredibly short time. Take into account that the targets are usually confined to a fairly small space, like a classroom or school hallway or concert venue, and the number of potential wounded and killed is not important. You guys are hanging a lot of hats on the definition of "assault rifle" when what you and I, in particular, have said is that we need to study why these things are happening and come up with a solution. Arguing the "assault rifle" question is not important. Arguing, and proving, that there is or is not a correlation between more or fewer guns or more or less concealed carry, measurable things such as those, is what is going to make it easier to come to a consensus between the opposing viewpoints.

Forget definitions. Forget the Second Amendment. Remember that we, as a nation, are responsible for the health and safety of our citizens. Your Second Amendments is not going anywhere, and you know it. Reasonable restrictions are not going to hurt anyone but the perpetrators of these heinous crimes. And that is the wish of each and every one of us involved in this conversation, isn't it?

March 15, 2018 at 2:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

'Guns are not worth more than children’s lives': One month after Florida massacre, students in Lawrence join national walkout

Cary, that is an eye-opening chart you've got there. And it shows me one glaring conclusion: all the causes of death listed are currently being researched, and FOUGHT, by scientific means. Vaccines, research, statutes: all are aimed at understanding the causes of and cutting down the incidence of those killers.

Point out to me what scientific method is being applied to gun violence. And scientific method does not include emotional, knee jerk action and reaction from either side of the gun problem.

We, as a nation, have been able to attack nearly every malady known to man, not always successfully, but in an attempt to allay suffering and death. Why in God's name can we not put our minds, scientifically, to this issue?

March 14, 2018 at 10:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Opinion: President should come clean about Stormy

So, you're saying that Clinton was wrong in trying to cover his escapade(s) but that makes it OK for Chump? That's Summers logic in spades. Thanks for the laugh.

March 12, 2018 at 10:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter to the editor: He said what?

And that is what is most frightening about Chump: he has no respect for the office he holds or the people he represents or the other nations of the world. As Scott says, nobody takes him seriously, so why should he be representing this country? That he is backed by a significant percentage of the nation's voters is more frightening, because they are the ones who put him in his position.

And, by the way, Chump doesn't joke but says things he thinks his base want to hear. If what comes out of his mouth (never his brain) resonates with a portion of the nation, he runs with it, until he doesn't. So, if it becomes apparent to him that a number of voters would like to have a king, he'll go with that, justifying the thought in innumerable ignorant ways, until it runs out of steam, all the while ignoring the things he doesn't understand. And that is terribly dangerous.

March 12, 2018 at 10:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter to the editor: He said what?

You mean, like under the current president?

March 10, 2018 at 12:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter to the editor: He said what?

Agree, in part. Any sales position, including insurance and politics, requires that the sales person winnow out the needs and wants, and ability, of the customer to buy into the product, service, or ideology of the selling person.

However, in order to build a lasting relationship with the buyer, any good sales person or politician will do all he/she can to maintain the good will of two parties: the buyer and the seller. In Chump's case, he had garnered little trust from his seller (the United States citizens) or his buyer. We are in the midst of a fairly world-wide downturn in the trust the world endows in us, and Chump has shown, repeatedly, that he trusts nearly nobody, except, perhaps, Putin and Mr. China.

March 10, 2018 at 11:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter to the editor: He said what?

Sure. Here it is:


March 10, 2018 at 11:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: A few numbers to consider

What part of "show us what you mean" do you not get, Bob? You may get by with this kind of non-answer in your daily life but not here, not with anyone who thinks, anyone who actually is looking for solutions. As you well know, you have dodged this question numerous times, and have suggested anywhere from 5% to the current 30% cuts. Not once, no, not ONE TIME, have you ponied up to the bar and told us just exactly who and how these cuts should be done. Your knowledge of economics is apparently limited to the counting of change in your pocket.

"If you're not a part of the solution, you're part of the problem". I don't disparage your non-responses because of my own frustration, but because your inane comments in this vein lead others to think your impossible suggestions may actually be possible. You, Bob, are a constant purveyor of "fake solutions". Fortunately, the number of adults who are taking this whole economic thing seriously has grown, and sanity will, eventually, rule once again in Kansas.

March 10, 2018 at 11:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal )