I had intended on dropping this for a number of reasons. I mention this only as an FYI to some here because of the flippant comments about cyber-stalking... Some posters on these forums have been targeted in the past, in the real world
, specifically because of positions taken on these forums. Targeting me is one thing, but the potential for economic, emotional and potentially physical (who knows how far the person was going to go) harm to my family crosses the line. It's happened, the police were involved, it was a federal crime, the person is known and that situation is done. I have been very careful in most (if not all) of my posts since returning from a long, self-imposed lurking status (because of the fear and stress the "real world" situation caused my family). However, after hearing of this post, I feel I must comment. To wit:
Have any of you paused to realized that I'm not the one that started this talk of statistics? It wasn't me coming in here to Bert he was wrong to blame it on the guns. That was Panther. Everything I have said about gun control has been to other people, who in my opinion (and I didn't want to come here to cast recriminations) were insensitive in how they approached the subject.
Look at Panther's line:
I know it is tough to lose someone you love (no matter how it happens), but thinking that it was in any way "the gun's fault" for being "easily available" doesn't work for me
So here we have Bert, in his pain, talking in a less-than-positive (while still saying he does keep a gun) way about gun ownership and what did Panther do? Got up on his soap box telling Bert his thinking "doesn't work for me" Maybe he was right, maybe those stats are dead on, but is that what Bert really needs? If you are so concerned with Bert's pain, why not just let him post whatever he feels like, without trying to prove him wrong? Why critique his feelings just one month after it happened?
Did you see me coming in here and telling Bert what the statistics say about gun safety? No, I responded Panther and you. You're furious that I would have the gall to question people who have had such serious tragedies and yet turn a blind eye to it when your friend does it.
Look Justin, if you're going to quote me, please quote me completely, not
selectively. I could easily cut & paste your posts selectively and easily make you look like an ignorant, insensative @$$hole too.
My very first sentences
when joining this thread were:
I've been avoiding any comment on this thread. I am very sorry to hear of Bert's loss..."
I only joined this thread because I was mentioned. The issue of having vs not having a firearm and similar off-shoots had already
been brought up. For all of your complaints and underlying dislike of what they indicate, the truth is that I posted cited stats from a source recognized by both sides of the debate to back up what I said. I did so because KentuckyUechi said "statistically", so I was providing some statistics. Even in that very first lengthy post I concluded with:
"As was said before, this isn't meant to be callous and I'm truly sorry for the tragedies that people have suffered."
Both sympathy and an acknowledgement of ALL of the tragedies people had suffered and were dealing with.
Here's the bottom line. I don't really know, and I'm not going to pretend to know what Bert needs. Nor am I going to pretend like the losses I've suffered in my own life make me an expert on how he feels right now. I have very intentionally avoided pretending like anything that I, a complete stranger on the internet could say has any true meaning in the face of such a highly personal tragedy. That seems awfully presumptuous to me. There's lots of maybe-helpful things I could say about suicide, but it's not my place to presume that I know about someone else's feelings. I don't begrudge anyone well-wishes or comforting words. There is value in that. This is just how I feel about it.
I responded to Glenn with my "bottom line", which evidently doesn't cut it for some either. That's fine. But in addition to painting me as a callous statistics spouting @$$hole, you also strongly imply in this statement that I am pretending that anything I could say has any true meaning. And follow that up with the statement that it "seems awfully presumptuous to me". Previously you wrote (and I did not respond):
I have known that people's experiences affect them for a long time. In fact, that's exactly the point that you don't seem to be getting. These life experiences that mold people don't always mold them in positive ways. Not all experience is wisdom. It's all too easy to be emotionally scarred by an event and make bad decisions because of that experience. That's why it's important to try and get perspective on the things you experience, maybe even some counseling so that you don't end up having trouble detaching enough from the emotional content to make informed choices.
So do I understand that the way people think about things is influenced by their experiences, particularly traumatic ones? Of course I do. But you seem to be assuming that those experiences always equate to having a better perspective on these things, and I think that's quite clearly not how people work.
Perhaps it is just your style, perhaps I misunderstand, perhaps it is a veiled insult... regardless:
You say that those experiences don't mold people in a positive way, are not wise, make it easy for someone who is emotionally scarred to make bad decisions and
that you think that your perspective is quite clearly the truth. I
say, if I learn from my experiences and it keeps me and my loved ones safe, alive, healthy and happy, I really don't care whether you think it is either positive OR wise
! It is interesting that you take this position only when there is something that is said and you can't refute it... Now... for the scars... They're physical... The only ones that have seen them are my wife and doctors. I don't play the "wanna see my scars" game. You say that it is important to try and get perspective and (perhaps) counseling in order to make informed choices. Well... Here's where and why I do get emotional on this... You have NO effin' idea WHAT counseling I have or have not gone through! NONE... I never saw YOUR sorry @$$ in the corner when I was up at night "trying to get perspective" on things that I was working through and I have made informed decisions even IF they are "incorrect" from your esteemed perspective. You see, you have shown that it isn't about guns... it's about control.
You also neglected to quote this, which you imply was/is your original position and which I wrote pages earlier. I think it needs to be reiterated:
"I didn't join this thread until directly mentioned. I've said it all along... I feel bad about Bert's loss. I know what it's like to lose someone you love tragically... Nothing can be said by anyone to offer true comfort. The best thing that was ever said to me by anyone was, "I know..." Nothing else, just that. It's tough and I knew this would turn into the whole "gun debate". I didn't think this thread should be about the whole "gun debate", I thought (and still do) that this should be about Kentuck's loss... And there's nothing that anyone can really say to make it any better.
"... people have said many things and even said that it "gets better with time", here's what I've learned. That's BS... It doesn't get better with time, you just learn to live with it."
"I'm really truly sorry Bert, but... I know...
One other thing that I've learned, but more recently, is that life is just too short to waste time with people who aren't worth my time.
To lighten up a little bit, you wrote:
I never said that anybody was letting Tommy go play with guns.
Unless, of course, if it's a Tommy gun
Finally, I apologize to Bill-Sensei AND to KentuckyUechi for being a party to taking this thread off on a tangent when it shouldn't have happened. Again, Bert... Our Sympathies for your loss and our wishes for your comfort during this sad time in the life of your family. Please take care...