View Full Version : Another school shooting, multiple fatalities
They are choosy about the rights they deem worth protecting.
In this era I've come to expect a high degree of virtue signaling, I'd just expect a little more consistency in how affirmed rights are protected. Or perhaps we're beyond that.
ToomuchStuff
3-4-18, 2:09am
Michigan Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act
There was a case a few years ago, I went Googling for: https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-sues-detroit-hotel-over-age-discrimination
Seems a Michigan reservist would be the right case against any of these companies, for selling products they stock.
I don't know that Fox has such dominant ratings. At best, they're the tallest man in Lilliput. I sometimes suspect that if they didn't exist it would have been necessary to invent them in aid of crudely caricaturing deplorables for the left to deplore.
Only 5 companies own 90% of all the media outlets, so, yes, what you see on TV is carefully designed to bring the most people under the Big Top. Nothing to do with "news" at all.
Only 5 companies own 90% of all the media outlets, so, yes, what you see on TV is carefully designed to bring the most people under the Big Top. Nothing to do with "news" at all.
This meme gets repeated a lot, presumably to alarm us that we are all puppets of a few corporate overlords. They never tell us whether "control" is market capitalization, some form of viewership/readership/eyeballs/listenership, etc. Just an ominous "control" The Meme Policeman website has an interesting story of it's genesis.
http://memepoliceman.com/corporate-media-control/
Whether true or not, this factoid is irrelevant. There is no Big Top. It's more like a sideshow with lots and lots of barkers. You can chose between right-wing or left-wing outrage, the course of true love, the lives of alligator hunters or house flippers, old movies, new movies and ever more obscure sports. You can find more diversity of opinion and variety now than in the era of the big three broadcasters and the "fairness doctrine". Imbuing Fox News or any other source with eldritch powers over the minds of the masses is simply ridiculous. Do you care more about what Disney or Comcast thinks, or do they care more about what you think?
This meme gets repeated a lot, presumably to alarm us that we are all puppets of a few corporate overlords. ...Do you care more about what Disney or Comcast thinks, or do they care more about what you think?
I learned about this meme before memes were memes, at least in terms of how we view them today as part of the internet culture. On vacation in Vermont in the early 2000s (so Frugal Dad was absolutely NOT the first reference) I saw a film sponsored by Action Committee for Media Education. I can't even remember what the name of the film was, but it was pretty compelling. And my own experience in marketing corroborates the efficacy of media to "educate" people to an intended message.
There is no doubt about it, we may not be walking zombies, but you have to be naive to believe that in our media-saturated culture our choices are 100% freely made. Or that the conclusions we come to are not influenced by click-bait sound-bytes repeated ad nauseam by the top of the media chain.
I learned about this meme before memes were memes, at least in terms of how we view them today as part of the internet culture. On vacation in Vermont in the early 2000s (so Frugal Dad was absolutely NOT the first reference) I saw a film sponsored by Action Committee for Media Education. I can't even remember what the name of the film was, but it was pretty compelling. And my own experience in marketing corroborates the efficacy of media to "educate" people to an intended message.
There is no doubt about it, we may not be walking zombies, but you have to be naive to believe that in our media-saturated culture our choices are 100% freely made. Or that the conclusions we come to are not influenced by click-bait sound-bytes repeated ad nauseam by the top of the media chain.
There's plenty of doubt about it. Is all that piffle being forced upon us by masterminds from the top down, or bubbling up from the fever swamps below before Big Media becomes aware of it?
I question the power of the professional chattering classes to control the minds of the masses. They did their level best to make Donald Trump into a sort of nightmare monster, and in the process probably aided his cause more than hindered it. A substantial percentage of voters listened and decided he was the monster they were looking for. I think by and large people chose the media sources they want to believe rather than submit glassy-eyed to the whims of a few CEOs, weaponized Russian BS or weeping late-night show hosts.
dado potato
3-5-18, 3:42pm
In the Wisconsin State Assembly (Legislature) a new bill has been sponsored to authorize family members to enlist the aid of law enforcement to remove firearms and ammo from another family member if they perceive "red flags" in his/her behavior. It is considered a "common sense" response to gun violence, which will not be regarded as a threat to responsible, safe owners of firearms.
Because I'm guessing every angry yahoo with a grudge doesn't constitute a "well-regulated militia."
From Wikipedia: The Army National Guard (ARNG), in conjunction with the Air National Guard, is a militia force and a federal military reserve force of the United States.
I'm pretty sure the Founding Fathers would sign off on this fitting their definition.
Because I'm guessing every angry yahoo with a grudge doesn't constitute a "well-regulated militia."
From Wikipedia: The Army National Guard (ARNG), in conjunction with the Air National Guard, is a militia force and a federal military reserve force of the United States.
I'm pretty sure the Founding Fathers would sign off on this fitting their definition.
I’m pretty sure the Supreme Court went into some detail on this:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/
I’m pretty sure the Supreme Court went into some detail on this:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/
Predictable, given the makeup of the court, but wrong, IMO. I agree with the minority here.
Predictable, given the makeup of the court, but wrong, IMO. I agree with the minority here.
Have you read the opinions? What specific points in the majority opinion do you have issues with?
iris lilies
3-5-18, 9:08pm
Predictable, given the makeup of the court, but wrong, IMO. I agree with the minority here.
You know the court is wrong, just Like I know the court was wrong about terming the Obamacare required pur hase of a commercial product a “tax.” Tax my ass.
*WE* know what is constitutional and was isnt, right? :~) Dont need to read no steenkin opinion.
dado potato
3-6-18, 1:12am
A few more details on the "Lethal Violence Protective Order Bill" in the Wisconsin Assembly:
It was introduced by Democrats on 2/28/18 in the Republican-majority legislature. If passed into law, a family member or a law enforcement officer could petition the court for an injunction to temporarily prevent a certain individual from possessing or buying a firearm. A Lethal Violence Protective Order (LVPO) would be effective for an initial 180 days, and it could be extended by the court for additional 180-day periods.
A similar plan was proposed by the Governor of Florida. I don't know if it passed into law.
Five other states have similar laws: CT, IN, CA, OR and WA.
Williamsmith
3-15-18, 9:41am
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/03/14/teacher-accidentally-discharges-firearm-in-calif-classroom-he-was-trained-in-gun-use/?utm_term=.1df50f8cfa27A
A good example in the news recently....and there have been others.....but this one points out the poor judgement of having teachers, administrators and staff carry guns on school campuses. It makes far more sense to create a true “gun free zone” with outer perimeter and stringent entry procedures than it does to introduce more firearms to the environment. I suspect the press has not paid much attention to these types of incidents but now that there is interest in them they will be brought to the attention of the nation.
Im waiting for the story about an armed teacher taking out a bad guy. I’m just wondering how many unintentional discharges there will be for every tragedy averted...
ToomuchStuff
3-15-18, 11:28pm
I've heard people question whether this reserve police officer, will have a pile of cash headed his way, after this display of incompetence. He is in what they would like to be a gun free state.
dado potato
3-27-18, 1:13pm
I see that splinternews has researched the tweets of Senators and Members of Congress which offer thoughts and prayers after this shooting event in Florida, and matched them with the dollar amount each Congressional Tweeter of sympathy received from the NRA Political Victory Fund, based on public records. The typical donation to a Member of Congress was $2,000 for the last election, based on the NRA's assessment of "voting record, public statements, and responses to NRA questionnaires".
I sense that the leaders in the recent March for Our Lives would like to see the electorate vote in the next election to defeat incumbent Members of Congress who have been given an "A Grade" and money by the NRA-PVF.
According to splintergroups, the largest recipient in the House of Representatives was Barbara Comstock (R-VA) $10,400
Recipients of $9,900 included:
Mike Coffman (R-CO)
Will Hurt (R-TX)
John Katko (R-NY)
Bruce Poliquin (R-ME)
Lee Zeldin (R-NY)
In the Senate, recipients of $9,900 included:
Marco Rubio (R-FL)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Bob Portman (R-OH)
Joni Ernst (R-IA)
Thom Tillis (R-NC)
http://splinternews.com/every-member-of-congress-who-took-money-from-the-nra-an-1823035413
I think it's odd that an organization dedicated to gun safety and maintaining a constitutional right enshrined for over 200 years is met with such a strong opposition designed to take away a citizen's right to an effective self defense. For the life of me I can't understand how they can be portrayed as the bad guy.
Because they've gradually morphed into a marketing lobby? Because they oppose any incremental regulation as if sponsored by the devil himself? Because they aggressively target legislators who propose such legislation? If the NRA were just about education and safety, no one would oppose them.
Because they've gradually morphed into a marketing lobby? Because they oppose any incremental regulation as if sponsored by the devil himself? Because they aggressively target legislators who propose such legislation? If the NRA were just about education and safety, no one would oppose them.
Ahhh, like Planned Parenthood. I get it now.
I read an article about an NRA member who remembered loving his gun club as a youth. He loved the concentration required, the sportsmanship and competitions. His observation then, if I remember it correctly, that the NRA was a wonderful organization teaching and ensuring that members used their guns wisely and thoughtfully. He wrote that he is deeply concerned that now that it is all about access to guns and the 2nd Amendment rights.
DH and I had long guns, hunting licences etc properly handled and stored. A Conservation Officer told me that if I went out with DH hunting in our bush, I really should have my licence so I did. Did I ever shoot anything beyond severely injured animals, no. DH hunted with friends in other areas and enjoyed it.
Our approach to gun ownership was similar to the first person's story about the NRA existing and supporting safe, responsible use of sporting guns.
When did the NRA's emphasis on the 2nd Amendment rights take over which then enabled war weapons, no longer focusing on the simple everyday sporting guns? Not being snarky but genuinely curious
I’m pretty sure the Supreme Court went into some detail on this:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/
Scalia himself went into some detail about the dubious right of citizens to own military-style weapons, and the legality of various existing regulations.
Justice Scalia in re Heller:
“It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service — M-16 rifles and the like — may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.”
The prefatory clause to which the justice refers, of course, is the one about “a well-regulated militia.” The AR-15, used in San Bernardino, is an M-16 knockoff.
So rather than saying “assault weapons,” in the future perhaps we should say “the kinds of weapons that Justice Antonin Scalia has defined as ‘dangerous and unusual’ and subject to regulation or an outright ban under the Second Amendment.” From the NYT Dec. 11, 2015
This wasn't an egregious decision, IMO, but it shouldn't be held up as a blanket approbation of any and all firearms. Heller was a peace officer--you might say a member of a militia, which put an interesting spin on it.
The AR-15, used in San Bernardino, is an M-16 knockoff.
Would it bother you if I corrected this statement? It's the other way around, the M-16 is a modified version of the previously existing AR-15.
The AR-15 was designed and produced for civilian use in the mid 50's and the M-16 was the military's modified version, created in the early 60's.
I think it's interesting that the AR-15 was in use for nearly 50 years before anyone labeled it an assault weapon. It didn't change, but something else surely did.
What civilian use, one wonders.
I'm clearly not an expert in firearms. The closest I've come to one was one night when a drag queen (who apparently felt he needed protection) asked me to hold his jacket, and warned me there was a pistol aboard.
What civilian use, one wonders.
Do we also wonder why Rosa Parks needed to sit in the front of the bus? No, of course not.
Chicken lady
3-27-18, 3:59pm
Alan, at what point do you believe it is appropriate to begin shooting government officials and/or police officers? Or would it b e the national guard or the army at that point?
Alan, at what point do you believe it is appropriate to begin shooting government officials and/or police officers? Or would it b e the national guard or the army at that point?
What an odd question! The only time it's ever justified to use deadly force against anyone is to protect yourself or another from imminent serious bodily harm or death. I don't understand the police officer/government official part.
By the way, in Ohio that's the correct answer to one of the test questions all Concealed Carry permit holders must pass. Betcha didn't know that, did you?
Chicken lady
3-27-18, 4:14pm
Did not know that. Can’t actually imagine a scenario in which I would need to.
Rosa Parks was advocating for equal rights when she sat at the front of the bus - civilian use of civil disobedience.
so I saw an implied parallel to civilian use of an AR-15 to protect or secure ones rights. Which led to the question. So, to closely follow Jane, what do you see as the appropriate civilian use of an AR-15?
A volunteer at the food bank thinks it is to allow us to be armed at a level that would allow us to resist the government because the only thing standing between us and a police state is the right to have an AR-15. I do not agree with him. But I am glad that he recently had his cataracts removed.
I don't think that's the only thing standing between us and a police state, but history has shown that all police states disarm their citizens. Do you think they might be related?
No one is talking about taking pistols and rifles away. Or sufficient ammo to keep the enemy at bay.
ToomuchStuff
3-27-18, 5:45pm
No one is talking about taking pistols and rifles away. Or sufficient ammo to keep the enemy at bay.
An AR15 is a rifle. It is exactly what they are talking about.
Teacher Terry
3-27-18, 5:50pm
-I come from a hunting family and if you used a AR 15 to hunt there would be nothing left of the animal worth eating. It is ridiculous that civilians can own them.
ToomuchStuff
3-27-18, 5:59pm
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=2129&stc=1
ToomuchStuff
3-27-18, 6:01pm
-I come from a hunting family and if you used a AR 15 to hunt there would be nothing left of the animal worth eating. It is ridiculous that civilians can own them.
Really? What caliber AR15? They can be used to shoot different rounds.
Also the second amendment is not just hunting. It is a right to have a defense against a tyrannical government.
-I come from a hunting family and if you used a AR 15 to hunt there would be nothing left of the animal worth eating. It is ridiculous that civilians can own them.
Really? I think that may be true for small game such as a rabbit or squirrel, but for larger game such as deer? The other popular ammo for larger game is the 30.06 which is much more powerful and is probably a better choice because it will take down a larger target more efficiently. The other plus for 30.06 is that it isn't associated with a scary looking rifle like the .223 caliber (5.56mm) rounds are. But, to get back to your point, I think the perfectly acceptable 30.06 does more damage to the animal.
Ultralight
3-27-18, 6:20pm
Really? I think that may be true for small game such as a rabbit or squirrel, but for larger game such as deer? The other popular ammo for larger game is the 30.06 which is much more powerful and is probably a better choice because it will take down a larger target more efficiently. The other plus for 30.06 is that it isn't associated with a scary looking rifle like the .223 caliber (5.56mm) rounds are. But, to get back to your point, I think the perfectly acceptable 30.06 does more damage to the animal.
A 20 gauge pump shotgun can do a lot -- it can bring down some birds (even ducks with a magnum load). Put a slug barrel on it and you got a gun that can bring down the biggest deer. Throw a short barrel on it and you have an excellent home defense gun. You know all this, I am sure. You don't really need a 30.06, though a 30.06 deer rifle could come in handy way out west where you need to take longer shots.
A 20 gauge pump shotgun can do a lot -- it can bring down some birds (even ducks with a magnum load). Put a slug barrel on it and you got a gun that can bring down the biggest deer. Throw a short barrel on it and you have an excellent home defense gun. You know all this, I am sure. You don't really need a 30.06, though a 30.06 deer rifle could come in handy way out west where you need to take longer shots.
Yep, just making a point.
Ultralight
3-27-18, 6:44pm
Yep, just making a point.
Your point is well-taken.
I gotta say, the gun rights issue is one that really has me torn. I love shooting sporting clays and have been a member of gun clubs. I have gone hunting and harvested dinner. I've also just plinked tin cans and such. All fun!
But I see gun culture in America as totally off any reasonable course.
I would much rather outlaw automobiles than guns!
Teacher Terry
3-27-18, 7:12pm
Some people will be singing a different tune when it is your loved one or child that gets slaughtered for no good reason.
flowerseverywhere
3-27-18, 7:28pm
So I have a question for Alan and others who are gun owners
what is wrong with banning gun shows and internet sales?
what is wrong with background checks?
what is wrong with a waiting period?
what is wrong with guns having age and citizenship restrictions? Certainly you cannot think it is a good idea for an illegal citizen or non citizen who is active with ISIS getting a gun.
aren’t there enough guns to choose from that certain guns are not needed to be owned by normal citizens? I can even see exceptions made for those that demonstrate they know what they are doing, and have had more training.
i’m not Getting it. I don’t want to take anyone’s guns away but it seems reasonable that guns should only be in the hands of responsible law abiding citizens.
So I have a question for Alan and others who are gun owners
what is wrong with banning gun shows and internet sales?
what is wrong with background checks?
what is wrong with a waiting period?
what is wrong with guns having age and citizenship restrictions? Certainly you cannot think it is a good idea for an illegal citizen or non citizen who is active with ISIS getting a gun.
aren’t there enough guns to choose from that certain guns are not needed to be owned by normal citizens? I can even see exceptions made for those that demonstrate they know what they are doing, and have had more training.
i’m not Getting it. I don’t want to take anyone’s guns away but it seems reasonable that guns should only be in the hands of responsible law abiding citizens.
I can only speak for myself but when you say you don't want to take guns away, but do admit that you want to create a restrictive ownership environment, what I hear is "I want to limit the natural right to the means of self defense to those I approve of", and I don't trust people who may decide that I shouldn't have that right. Without natural rights, how can you have civil rights?
iris lilies
3-27-18, 8:00pm
Some people will be singing a different tune when it is your loved one or child that gets slaughtered for no good reason.
No, that is silly to the point of being offensive. Children here in my city are slaughtered all the time. My number could be up next, or DH’s number, or my dog’s number. Every gun involved in these murders are held illegally. EVERY gun.
so my point, should I need to speel it out, is that criminals will get guns.
Chicken lady
3-27-18, 8:24pm
So Alan, I feel like I got another implied response, but can I get a declarative sentence? What, in your opinion, is the acceptable civilian use for a semi-automatic weapon, such as the AR-15?
also, i don’t have an issue with gun shows, I do have an issue with allowing them as a legal way to get around background checks. I imagine they are probably fun for those with an interest in guns.
we repealed prohibition. You still need a liquor license to sell hard stuff and an ID that says you’re 21 to buy any. So to speak to your comparison - some people are still giving up some “rights” around alcohol “for the children” (or for whatever we based that on.)
also, I don’t think owning a gun is a natural right. Freedom of movement is a natural right. Driving a car comes with all kinds of regulations. I have a right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” but my liberty is restricted in many ways, and my pursuit of happiness in many more. As a middle aged, middle class, healthy white female, I seem to be on pretty solid ground with regards to “life”. My uncle, however, has been removed from the transplant list, so I guess he no longer has an unfettered right to life.
Ultralight
3-27-18, 8:25pm
I don't believe in natural rights. I believe you get and keep what you fight for or threaten meaningfully enough for.
Chicken lady
3-27-18, 8:27pm
Nasty short and brutish eh?
Ultralight
3-27-18, 8:29pm
Nasty short and brutish eh?
No.
So Alan, I feel like I got another implied response, but can I get a declarative sentence? What, in your opinion, is the acceptable civilian use for a semi-automatic weapon, such as the AR-15?
Declarative sentences are limiting, what you call my implied response encourages thoughtfulness, but if you insist.
I think the acceptable civilian usage of any weapon include, but are not limited to, self defense, sport, hunting and any other legal purpose you might imagine. I can only imagine one unacceptable use of a weapon, that being the infliction of intentional harm on another, and we already have laws against that.
-I come from a hunting family and if you used a AR 15 to hunt there would be nothing left of the animal worth eating. It is ridiculous that civilians can own them.
My son deer hunts with his. As Mentioned it’s a very small caliber. I bought a Smith and Weston MP-15 before the election. I took it to the range to try it out, but it doesn’t do much for me. When my 10 year old grandson comes to visit I’ll probably take him to the range and let him shoot it some.
It will be years before he will be big enough to shoot a 30-06, or something like a .7mm mag. Obviously your hunting family either hunts very small game like rabbits, or like many just exaggerating.
flowerseverywhere
3-28-18, 11:01am
I can only speak for myself but when you say you don't want to take guns away, but do admit that you want to create a restrictive ownership environment, what I hear is "I want to limit the natural right to the means of self defense to those I approve of", and I don't trust people who may decide that I shouldn't have that right. Without natural rights, how can you have civil rights?
i do a lot of things that are an inconvenience because I feel they are for the greater good. I pay my taxes although I know a lot of it will be going towards illegal regligious or border wars, even though loopholes are used to make it seem OK. I know my luggage may be searched when I board a plane, even though I have never been even charged with a crime and I was born in the US.
There are are a lot of very liberal policies I don’t agree with, like sanctuary cities, paying medical and housing benefits for instance for able bodied people without young children who don’t want to work or even repeal of the second amendment. Also, abortion on demand I struggle with, which many gun rights people like to use as a defense for gun ownership. Who cares if some innocents are killed, look at abortion. It should certainly should be readily accessible to rape and incest victims or if the life of the mother or child is in danger. But in my sixties it certainly is not a decision I have to make, and I never had an unwanted pregnancy.
But I am trying hard hard to understand your viewpoint. I know that many very conservative people want prayers to Jesus Christ in school and the Ten Commandments displayed in federal buildings while clear violations of the commandments like adultery and lying to get what you want are ignored which makes for very murky interpretations. however as long as I see news reports that children are slaughtered by people with guns, that police, border patrol, first responders etc. are killed by people with guns, I just cannot understand why background checks, waiting periods and so on are so much of an inconvenience to your natural rights to not be put in place.
Teacher Terry
3-28-18, 1:58pm
My Dad hunted small game and my ex's entire family deer and they used a regular rifle. It fired one shot at a time. I feel like people are purposely acting dim like having a AR-15 is needed for hunting instead of a regular rifle. We have all sorts of limits on our freedoms for the good of others. Everything in life comes with restrictions if we are going to live in a civilized society. Since our kids are dying from being killed at school it is common sense that the laws we have are not working. We need more protection. If I had grandchildren I would be afraid to see them go to school which is pretty sad. You don't want your rights restricted but what about the rights of all those kids who will never grow up because the adults can't make common sense decisions? IL: people do change their opinions when it hits close to home. Many anti-death penalty people start singing a different tune once their loved one is murdered. You don't have kids but the love you have for your child or grandchild is like no other love you will ever experience. You do not love another person on the planet the way you love your very own child. It is hard to explain if you have not experienced it.
Today at lunch I heard a guy claim that Americans have a greater chance of being killed by a lightning strike than a mass shooter.
I’m not sure where I could go to verify that claim with any confidence. It seems like one of those made-up memes that infest the internet. On the other hand, it could be weird enough to be true.
My Dad hunted small game and my ex's entire family deer and they used a regular rifle. It fired one shot at a time. I feel like people are purposely acting dim like having a AR-15 is needed for hunting instead of a regular rifle. We have all sorts of limits on our freedoms for the good of others. Everything in life comes with restrictions if we are going to live in a civilized society. Since our kids are dying from being killed at school it is common sense that the laws we have are not working. We need more protection. If I had grandchildren I would be afraid to see them go to school which is pretty sad. You don't want your rights restricted but what about the rights of all those kids who will never grow up because the adults can't make common sense decisions? IL: people do change their opinions when it hits close to home. Many anti-death penalty people start singing a different tune once their loved one is murdered. You don't have kids but the love you have for your child or grandchild is like no other love you will ever experience. You do not love another person on the planet the way you love your very own child. It is hard to explain if you have not experienced it.
I think law gets confused with protection. Dueling and lynching went on long after they were outlawed.
My Dad hunted small game and my ex's entire family deer and they used a regular rifle. It fired one shot at a time. I feel like people are purposely acting dim like having a AR-15 is needed for hunting instead of a regular rifle. We have all sorts of limits on our freedoms for the good of others. Everything in life comes with restrictions if we are going to live in a civilized society. Since our kids are dying from being killed at school it is common sense that the laws we have are not working. We need more protection. If I had grandchildren I would be afraid to see them go to school which is pretty sad. You don't want your rights restricted but what about the rights of all those kids who will never grow up because the adults can't make common sense decisions? IL: people do change their opinions when it hits close to home. Many anti-death penalty people start singing a different tune once their loved one is murdered. You don't have kids but the love you have for your child or grandchild is like no other love you will ever experience. You do not love another person on the planet the way you love your very own child. It is hard to explain if you have not experienced it.
A AR-15 fires one shot at a time just like any other semi automatic. And I’ll bet the cartridge is much smaller than what your ex’s hunted deer with.
Your basically wanting to ban something because it’s scary looking.
I can can understand wanting to do something, but we need to look more into what causes a kid to want to kill in the first place. I have grandkids also and worrying about a school shooting is way down on the list of concerns.
Ultralight
3-28-18, 5:48pm
My Dad hunted small game and my ex's entire family deer and they used a regular rifle. It fired one shot at a time.
A single shot rifle or shotgun surely will get the job done for hunting, though it can mean the difference between three ducks in the bag or just one. For my money, a Browning Pump Shotgun in 20 gauge can do most anything. It is a gun for the generalist. A Mossberg 500 or Remington 870 is good too, but I am a lefty, so the Browning is better for me. I have one in 12 gauge -- it is a bit too beefy for my taste. But it was a gift, so I used it for clays and geese.
I feel like people are purposely acting dim like having a AR-15 is needed for hunting instead of a regular rifle.
A person could hunt with an AR-15. But it is not really designed for that. When you say regular rifle, you probably mean a rifle designed for hunting. AR-15 are designed for combat and such. If you want to hunt get a Browning shotgun. If you want to be prepared to become a guerrilla defending your freedom from a tyrannical gubmint with all the black helicopters and stormtroopers and so forth, then an AR-15 is more for that.
But an AR-15 does not make a person prepared to be a freedom fighter. The average American is not mentally, physically, or emotionally prepared for that sort of thing. 40% of Americans are obese. Most barely know how to set up a tent, let alone run a jug line, build a campfire, or butcher wild fish and game.
The idea that Americans would fight back in any real way against tyrannical gubmint is preposterous in my opinion. Clinging to assault rifles gives many Americans the false comfort that they can prevent dictatorship. But I think most would roll over for the tyranny if their bellies were kept full and they could still buy piles of cheap plastic crap and gadgets from China.
We have all sorts of limits on our freedoms for the good of others. Everything in life comes with restrictions if we are going to live in a civilized society. Since our kids are dying from being killed at school it is common sense that the laws we have are not working. We need more protection. If I had grandchildren I would be afraid to see them go to school which is pretty sad. You don't want your rights restricted but what about the rights of all those kids who will never grow up because the adults can't make common sense decisions? IL: people do change their opinions when it hits close to home. Many anti-death penalty people start singing a different tune once their loved one is murdered. You don't have kids but the love you have for your child or grandchild is like no other love you will ever experience. You do not love another person on the planet the way you love your very own child. It is hard to explain if you have not experienced it.
1600+ kids die each year from car accidents. Since 2012 about 400 people (adults and children) have died in school shooting.
If you are worried about your children, keep them out of cars and off the roads.
Ultralight
3-28-18, 5:49pm
Your basically wanting to ban something because it’s scary looking.
I want to ban cars because about 40,000 Americans die each year in car wrecks!
Cars look scary to me!
dado potato
3-28-18, 5:58pm
Further to the above comment from dmc, Nikolas Cruz exhibited threatening behavior and got into fights with other students, which resulted in his expulsion from the school he later returned to and fired at least 100 rounds, killing 17 people in a matter of minutes.
Before the school took action to expel Cruz, he was banned from bringing a backpack to school, because he had threatened students that he might bring weapons and attack them.
Local police had been called to the home of Nikolas Cruz 39 times to deal with "strange and violent behavior", although it has not been reported how many of these police visits occurred before January when Cruz bought the AR-15.
The store which sold the AR-15 to Cruz, Sunrise Tactical Supplies, has closed permanently. The owners released a statement through their attorney, stating that the store sold the rifle to Cruz in January. There was nothing about the transaction that raised any suspicions in the minds of the store owners or employees.
They performed the background check as required by law. They received all the proper clearances. They held the rifle for the required five-business-day waiting period. On the ATF paperwork Cruz answered "No" to questions asking if he suffered from mental health issues, or was he ever institutionalized for treatment. (According to some accounts, Cruz had been "in and out of treatment"... maybe he lied on the form.) The statement adds that his ties to white supremacy and his expulsion from school were not reason enough to withhold a firearm from him.
The survivors of Parkland are saying there needs to be a ban on civilians owning the AR-15. They know that Cruz obtained the weapon legally, and he passed the background check, even though there were "red flags" in his behavior. Cruz might be described as obsessed with weapons, and he threatened people. I believe it trivializes their trauma, not to mention those who died in that shooting incident, to say they want the AR-15 to be banned "because it's scary looking".
Ultralight
3-28-18, 6:03pm
I am actually not opposed to any assault rifle ban. But how could we be sure it would stop there? What about pump shotguns? What about Glocks with high capacity clips?
I believe it trivializes their trauma, not to mention those who died in that shooting incident, to say they want the AR-15 to be banned "because it's scary looking".
Except that there are dozens of other weapons of the same or greater caliber, semi-automatic functionality, range and accuracy as the AR-15. It is singled out for it's looks.
I've always been perplexed by the AR-15's popularity. I had the opportunity to use its full automatic cousin, the M-16 at the range and in the field. I think many veterans may prefer the AR due to its familiarity and rugged dependability and perhaps that's what carries over to their children and grandchildren. At the end of the day it's just a semi-automatic rifle, no different than many others with perhaps a more traditional look. If it is banned, there's plenty of others to take its place, I think the fixation on this weapon is silly.
I really don’t have a problem with a AR ban. If it’s like the last one it will only mean the prices of the ones in circulation will go up. There are thousands of them out there. I only bought one on a whim, I shot it a few times and would have no problem selling it if the price was right. But for what they sell for now I might as well keep it.
And where does it stop from there? Some are terrified of anything that even looks like a gun.
Chicken lady
3-28-18, 6:30pm
“I think the fixation on this weapon is silly.”
me too. Alan. Except i’d Like to see a ban on any thing that fires more than the two barrels of a double barrel shotgun with a single trigger pull. If that means you miss your deer, go to the range and practice. If you end up short on ducks, come see me at the food bank.
“I think the fixation on this weapon is silly.”
me too. Alan. Except i’d Like to see a ban on any thing that fires more than the two barrels of a double barrel shotgun with a single trigger pull. If that means you miss your deer, go to the range and practice. If you end up short on ducks, come see me at the food bank.
So there is the rub, you actually want to ban the majority of guns. And what about the millions that are in circulation? Am I suppose to turn in my ancestors Winchester lever action 1873, 1886, 1892, 1894, among many others that have been passed down in my family. Those are capable of firing more than two shots, I’d like my son to have a couple of my old bolt action guns also, they are also capable of firing multiple rounds.
I havnt hunted in 15yrs after my old bird dog died, but I still like to shoot at targets, both fixed and moving. And many of my friends and family do enjoy going hunting. And I may decide to go again.
What do you think will happen if they were to ban certain guns? Last time it just meant they could not sell to the general public. There were none taken out of circulation.
And properly cared for they can last for generations.
flowerseverywhere
3-30-18, 9:59am
Should this guy have been able to buy a gun?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/30/florida-college-student-to-be-deported-after-skipping-class-buying-sniper-rifle-and-dyeing-hair-report.html
26 yearold with a non immigrant visa, college student in Florida. does He have second amendment rights?
by the way, I Am not anti second amendment. Just looking for clarification.
Should this guy have been able to buy a gun?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/30/florida-college-student-to-be-deported-after-skipping-class-buying-sniper-rifle-and-dyeing-hair-report.html
26 yearold with a non immigrant visa, college student in Florida. does He have second amendment rights?
by the way, I Am not anti second amendment. Just looking for clarification.
Yes, I think he had second amendment rights as a legal visitor to this country. In my view, the second amendment doesn't give us rights, it codifies natural rights and limits the government's ability to restrict or take away. Anyone considering the Bill of Rights as something the government has given them is missing the point and accepting the government as their master rather than their servant.
This fellow is facing deportation not because he bought a gun, but because he failed to meet the requirements of his visa by not attending classes. The "sniper rifle" comments and change in behaviors accelerated the process.
flowerseverywhere
3-30-18, 2:34pm
Yes, I think he had second amendment rights as a legal visitor to this country. In my view, the second amendment doesn't give us rights, it codifies natural rights and limits the government's ability to restrict or take away. Anyone considering the Bill of Rights as something the government has given them is missing the point and accepting the government as their master rather than their servant.
This fellow is facing deportation not because he bought a gun, but because he failed to meet the requirements of his visa by not attending classes. The "sniper rifle" comments and change in behaviors accelerated the process.
in the context of natural rights, you are referring to what is covered in the constitution? Interesting that in China it would have not been legal for him to own these weapons yet he can come here as a legal visitor and own them.
He cannot get get a job off campus, cannot vote, has no representative in Congress yet can buy whatever firearm he wants. I see it says that applicants for this visa are fingerprinted. Do you know what type of background checks are done in their home country? I could not find that info. Very interesting.
in the context of natural rights, you are referring to what is covered in the constitution? Interesting that in China it would have not been legal for him to own these weapons yet he can come here as a legal visitor and own them.
No, natural rights are not limited to a specific number, the Constitution simply affirms that some of the more important ones are beyond the scope of governments reach.
The fact that China doesn't trust its citizens doesn't mean that the US should follow suit, even if the US had the authority to do so. As a communist country, the Chinese people are not individuals with free will and natural rights, they are part of the collective that only enjoys whatever human rights the governing party allows. I find it remarkable that so many in the US would like to emulate that reality.
My understanding was that natural law theory posits certain rights that exist independently of government's power to create or confer. That doesn't mean that governments can't abridge or violate them, however. I think the great advantage a republic such as ours enjoys over a more direct form of democracy is that such rights are difficult enough to abridge that the fleeting emotions of the moment are insufficient to drive permanent change. It's like the Framers put together a list of rights that were too important to capriciously vote, re-interpret or regulate away. That's a good thing in my opinion.
While the frustrated autocrat in all of us might sometimes long for the power to "get things done", I'm glad things are the way they are.
flowerseverywhere
3-30-18, 9:47pm
No, natural rights are not limited to a specific number, the Constitution simply affirms that some of the more important ones are beyond the scope of governments reach.
The fact that China doesn't trust its citizens doesn't mean that the US should follow suit, even if the US had the authority to do so. As a communist country, the Chinese people are not individuals with free will and natural rights, they are part of the collective that only enjoys whatever human rights the governing party allows. I find it remarkable that so many in the US would like to emulate that reality.
I don’t want to take away or limit responsible citizens guns. I just see no value to society if Mentally Ill people have guns. I see no value if non citizens have guns. I see no value in Felons being able to buy guns at shows or over the internet. Explain to me what the value is.
Chicken lady
3-30-18, 10:01pm
To completely change tack, If we can stop your iPhone from working without your fingerprint, why can’t we stop your gun from firing?
It’s against the law now for felons to buy a gun, also mentally ill. I’ve also purchased guns at a gun show, but still had to go thru a background check, same as with buying over the internet. Guns must be shipped to a FFL holder and he runs the background check.
There are plenty of laws now on the books, why not enforce them. Who do more laws impact? Just the law abiding.
I’m guessing gun and ammo sales will start going up again. Time for me to start stocking up on powder and primers.
flowerseverywhere
3-31-18, 7:38am
It’s against the law now for felons to buy a gun, also mentally ill. I’ve also purchased guns at a gun show, but still had to go thru a background check, same as with buying over the internet. Guns must be shipped to a FFL holder and he runs the background check.
There are plenty of laws now on the books, why not enforce them. Who do more laws impact? Just the law abiding.
Are guns sold in the internet? How are checks done?
flowerseverywhere
3-31-18, 7:42am
I’m guessing gun and ammo sales will start going up again. Time for me to start stocking up on powder and primers.
Why do you need more? What is possibly going to happen that you need to stock up. I see only a few fringes calls for banning or taking away law abiding citizens guns. Is Trump going to mobilize the national guard to go door to door and take your guns? Are you suddenly going to have to hunker down in your home and fend off huge mobs of crazed anti gun activists? I actually know people who said if Obama was elected for a second term he would declare martial law and confiscate everyone’s gun. Where do these ideas come from? I don’t get it.
Why do you need more? What is possibly going to happen that you need to stock up. I see only a few fringes calls for banning or taking away law abiding citizens guns. Is Trump going to mobilize the national guard to go door to door and take your guns? Are you suddenly going to have to hunker down in your home and fend off huge mobs of crazed anti gun activists? I actually know people who said if Obama was elected for a second term he would declare martial law and confiscate everyone’s gun. Where do these ideas come from? I don’t get it.
I shoot sporting clays. It’s very challenging and I enjoy it. Currently my friends and I compete in around 3 or 4 tournaments a month. And we get together around twice a week for practice. These are shotgun events and there are also sub guage events. So you can compete with a 12, 20, 28, or 410 gauge shotgun. I have a 28 guage on the way. I already have the others.
I also like to go to the range and shoot pistol and rifle. This is just bullseye shooting and I’m just competing against myself, and a few friends. It’s also challenging and I enjoy it also.
So why stock up? I shoot 1000’s of rounds a year. When people start hearing about bullet bans, gun bans, taxes, or other infringements, they start hoarding. Then this causes supply problems, it was hard to get powder a few years ago, and 22 shells, and other ammo.
Since i I reload, and it’s cheaper to buy quantities in the thousands, I do.
Are guns sold in the internet? How are checks done?
The gun has to be sent to a FFL holder. They require a 4473 and background check. Same as if you bought it in a local store. I’m pretty sure you can’t mail a gun to anyone but a manufacture or FFL. Anytime a gun is sold and shipped thru the mail it requires the same background check that the state it’s being shipped to requires.
Guns can be advertised on the internet and sold locally. Then you would meet face to face and sell.
flowerseverywhere
3-31-18, 11:44am
I shoot sporting clays. It’s very challenging and I enjoy it. Currently my friends and I compete in around 3 or 4 tournaments a month. And we get together around twice a week for practice. These are shotgun events and there are also sub guage events. So you can compete with a 12, 20, 28, or 410 gauge shotgun. I have a 28 guage on the way. I already have the others.
I also like to go to the range and shoot pistol and rifle. This is just bullseye shooting and I’m just competing against myself, and a few friends. It’s also challenging and I enjoy it also.
So why stock up? I shoot 1000’s of rounds a year. When people start hearing about bullet bans, gun bans, taxes, or other infringements, they start hoarding. Then this causes supply problems, it was hard to get powder a few years ago, and 22 shells, and other ammo.
Since i I reload, and it’s cheaper to buy quantities in the thousands, I do.
makes perfect sense. The people I knew who were stocking up were preparing for government takeover. I assume the type of weapons you talk about are not the kind that someone would use to shoot from a windo into a crowded concert or gun down a classroom of children?
makes perfect sense. The people I knew who were stocking up were preparing for government takeover. I assume the type of weapons you talk about are not the kind that someone would use to shoot from a windo into a crowded concert or gun down a classroom of children?
The Germans wanted to ban these shotguns for use in war. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Model_1897
So im sure that if there is a will, there is a way for someone to kill if they chose. They will find a tool to get the job done.
makes perfect sense. The people I knew who were stocking up were preparing for government takeover. I assume the type of weapons you talk about are not the kind that someone would use to shoot from a windo into a crowded concert or gun down a classroom of children?
When I was seriously into competitive target shooting, I could go through 1000 rounds of ammunition a week. These days, I may go through that in a month.
When engaged in National Match events, I used an M1 Garand sold to me by the US Army, quite arguably a “weapon of war” as it had been used in war. And I fired ammunition the US Army sold me by the crate. (They still do this, btw...) I also used an M1A and an AR15. And a M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle. These are or were all military-issue firearms.
ToomuchStuff
3-31-18, 2:11pm
The gun has to be sent to a FFL holder. They require a 4473 and background check. Same as if you bought it in a local store. I’m pretty sure you can’t mail a gun to anyone but a manufacture or FFL. Anytime a gun is sold and shipped thru the mail it requires the same background check that the state it’s being shipped to requires.
Guns can be advertised on the internet and sold locally. Then you would meet face to face and sell.
Bit more to it then that.
From USPS site:
432.3 Rifles and Shotguns
Except under 431.2, unloaded rifles and shotguns are mailable. Mailers must comply with the rules and regulations under 27 CFR, Part 478, as well as state and local laws. The mailer may be required by the USPS to establish, by opening the parcel or by written certification, that the rifle or shotgun is unloaded and not ineligible for mailing. The following conditions also apply:
Subject to state, territory, or district regulations, rifles and shotguns may be mailed without restriction when intended for delivery within the same state of mailing. These items must:
Bear a “Return Service Requested” endorsement.
Be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
A rifle or shotgun owned by a non-FFL may be mailed outside the owner‘s state of residence by the owner to himself or herself, in care of another person in the other state where he or she intends to hunt or engage in any other lawful activity. These mailpieces must:
Be addressed to the owner.
Include the “in the care of” endorsement immediately preceding the name of the applicable temporary custodian.
Be opened by the rifle or shotgun owner only.
Be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
Mailing of rifles and shotguns between licensed FFL dealers, manufacturers, or importers are not restricted. The Postal Service recommends that these items be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
Rifles and shotguns may be mailed by a non-FFL owner domestically to a FFL dealer, manufacturer, or importer in any state. These items must be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
Except as described in 432.3a, licensed curio and relic collectors may mail firearms meeting the definition of curios or relics under 27 CFR 478.11 domestically to licensed FFL curio and relic collectors in any state. These items must be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
Firearms meeting the definition of a rifle or shotgun under 431.4 which are certified by the curator of a municipal, state, or federal museum, which exhibits firearms to be curios or relics of museum interest, may be accepted for mailing without restriction when mailed between governmental museums.
Air guns (see 431.6) that do not fall within the definition of firearms under 431.1a are mailable. A shipment containing an air gun with a muzzle velocity of 400 or more feet per second (fps) must include an adult signature service under DMM 503.8. Mailers must additionally comply with all applicable state and local regulations.
There are also some estate rules.
Some links:
BATFE Q&A for Unlicensed Persons - https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/unlicensed-persons
BATFE FAQs for Unlicensed Persons - https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearm...rearms-carrier (https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearms-frequently-asked-questions-unlicensed-persons#shipping-firearms-carrier)
18 USC § 922 - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922
27 CFR § 478.31 - https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/478.31
USPS Publication 52 - Hazardous, Restricted, and Perishable Mail (Firearms) - https://pe.usps.com/text/pub52/pub52c4_008.htm
UPS "How to Ship Firearms or Ammunition" - https://www.ups.com/us/en/help-cente.../firearms.page (https://www.ups.com/us/en/help-center/packaging-and-supplies/special-care-shipments/firearms.page)
FedEx "Prohibited or Restricted Articles - Firearms" - http://www.fedex.com/us/freight/rule..._articles.html (http://www.fedex.com/us/freight/rulestariff/prohibited_articles.html)
The “mail it to yourself” USPS regulation doesn’t “you can buy firearms on the Internet and ave them mailed to you”.
ToomuchStuff
3-31-18, 2:22pm
The “mail it to yourself” USPS regulation doesn’t “you can buy firearms on the Internet and ave them mailed to you”.
Correct, but I wanted to also make it clear about shipping already owned, or family owned/inherited firearms. Sorry for the confusion, been on 13 hour days this week and getting ready for another 6 of those.
Correct, but I wanted to also make it clear about shipping already owned, or family owned/inherited firearms. Sorry for the confusion, been on 13 hour days this week and getting ready for another 6 of those.
I had to do this when clearing out my grandfather’s estate, I had to bring a printout of that regulation and walk the postal people through it. When the counter clerk looked up in the large post office and unthinkingly yelled down to his supervisor at the far end “he’s got guns, I need help”, the clerk and I both paused, then moved very very slowly :-)
flowerseverywhere
3-31-18, 3:53pm
The Germans wanted to ban these shotguns for use in war. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Model_1897
So im sure that if there is a will, there is a way for someone to kill if they chose. They will find a tool to get the job done.
You didn’t answer my question
You didn’t answer my question
i do own a modern sporting rifle if that was your question. It functions the same as my BAR 7mm mag that I bought to go elk hunting.
Ive shot it at the range also, but it’s not as accurate as some of my other rifles.
And im not concerned about anyone coming to get me or whatever you were wondering about.
I’m much more concerned by teens driving while looking at their phones. We should require that their phones are disabled if they are traveling over 5 mph. That would save many more lives than a ban on scary looking rifles.
I’m much more concerned by teens driving while looking at their phones. We should require that their phones are disabled if they are traveling over 5 mph. That would save many more lives than a ban on scary looking rifles.
I think we should ban the sale of cell phones to people under the age of 21. Apparently 11 children a day die from texting-and-driving. http://www.textinganddrivingsafety.com/texting-and-driving-stats
Heck, we probably shouldn’t be letting teens/children drive at all, so no licenses until 21 too!
I think we should ban the sale of cell phones to people under the age of 21. Apparently 11 children a day die from texting-and-driving. http://www.textinganddrivingsafety.com/texting-and-driving-stats
Heck, we probably shouldn’t be letting teens/children drive at all, so no licenses until 21 too!
And they obviously aren’t mature enough to vote.
flowerseverywhere
3-31-18, 6:35pm
i do own a modern sporting rifle if that was your question. It functions the same as my BAR 7mm mag that I bought to go elk hunting.
Ive shot it at the range also, but it’s not as accurate as some of my other rifles.
And im not concerned about anyone coming to get me or whatever you were wondering about.
I’m much more concerned by teens driving while looking at their phones. We should require that their phones are disabled if they are traveling over 5 mph. That would save many more lives than a ban on scary looking rifles.
Regardless of what you are shooting, if it is game or targets I have no problem. Stockpiling in your case does not seem paranoid or odd. I just wondered of the type of guns you use are similar to the ones that can take out a crowd from a high window or multiple students quickly. I have never held or shot a gun and I have no idea what any of them are
I think that is why we have so many problems. I have no clue about guns. Like I said the second amendment I believe should stay in place, perhaps with some clarification when deeded.
The crazy either Ban All Guns or the NRA saying Obama or Hillary means the end of the second amendment are the extreme positions. I don’t think either of these extremes is where we will end up.
Agree about the phones. There should be a lockout above a few MPH. But then what about a passenger?
also, driving and eye tests once you reach 80, more severe penalties for drunk driving, nothing extreme, just safety.
flowerseverywhere
3-31-18, 6:38pm
I think we should ban the sale of cell phones to people under the age of 21. Apparently 11 children a day die from texting-and-driving. http://www.textinganddrivingsafety.com/texting-and-driving-stats
Heck, we probably shouldn’t be letting teens/children drive at all, so no licenses until 21 too!
in some states kids younger than that drive farm equipment. Raising the age to 21 might pose problems for teens who hold jobs though.
I have firearms I inherited from elderly relatives that would be quite suitable for engaging multiple targets rapidly, and capable of extended periods of continuous fire. They were made in the 1800s.
I also have a Colt Gatling gun from 1877 that would be quite efficient at such things. They cost $50k-$100k these days, and each round fired costs about $1, so at full speed it’d run you about $1k/minute to fire. The effective range is perhaps 1500 yards. I am unaware of any being used in criminal acts recently.
in some states kids younger than that drive farm equipment. Raising the age to 21 might pose problems for teens who hold jobs though.
Raising the age for rifles to 21 poses similar issues for rural residents. My daughter had her first rifle at 10 or so. At my very rural high school, we were able to check out our rifles from the school storage lockers when we went out to do our ranch chores.
Like I said the second amendment I believe should stay in place, perhaps with some clarification when deeded.
The beauty of our Constitution is that it grants no rights, it limits government's ability to violate your inherent rights. Once you start clarifying I'm afraid all inherent rights then become privileges, available only to our overseers.
Would this be a good moment to mention my fine collection of cannon? (Which oddly, are almost completely unregulated...)
flowerseverywhere
3-31-18, 8:16pm
Would this be a good moment to mention my fine collection of cannon? (Which oddly, are almost completely unregulated...)
so how did we get to the current hysteria? NRA hysteria that any talk about background checks or raising age to buy guns= they want to abolish the second amendment
far left= banning certain weapons and so on
what is the sensible middle ground, or is it all or nothing? How can current laws be enforced if there are laws that are not being enforced?
so how did we get to the current hysteria? NRA hysteria that any talk about background checks or raising age to buy guns= they want to abolish the second amendment
far left= banning certain weapons and so on
what is the sensible middle ground, or is it all or nothing? How can current laws be enforced if there are laws that are not being enforced?
Because the well of civil discourse has been poisoned, and it is no longer possible to have a sane discussion.
flowerseverywhere
3-31-18, 10:41pm
Because the well of civil discourse has been poisoned, and it is no longer possible to have a sane discussion.
But normal people like us can do it, even though we have different levels of education, different life experiences and come from all over the place. No one here has said “fake news” or called someone “cadet bone spurs”, “liar” or anything. Most of this lack of civil discourse is driven by the media seizing on every little thing, thentweeter in Chief, social media making mountains out of molehills and the biggest of all Money. NRA gave $50,000,000 to elect it’s preferred candidates. How did we let this happen. Do our politicians really represent us?
Do our politicians really represent us?
Sadly, yes.
While it may be more comfortable to blame politicians as a class, or one in particular for our present situation, I think we need to face the reality of who sent them there.
dado potato
4-2-18, 10:28am
Isabelle Robinson, a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School wrote an Op-ed for the New York Times 3/27/2018.
She has seen comments to the effect that if students had befriended and loved Cruz, maybe he would not have been so shamed, enraged and violent. She rejects the idea.
Five years before the shooting incident, Nikolas Cruz threw an apple at her in the school cafeteria, hitting her in the back. This is one example of his history of rage and violence in the school which she personally witnessed.
In Robinson's opinion, It is the responsibility of the school administration and guidance department to seek out those students (who have demonstrated aggressive, unpredictable or violent tendencies) and get them the help that they need, even if it is extremely specialized attention that cannot be provided at the same institution.
Sadly, yes.
While it may be more comfortable to blame politicians as a class, or one in particular for our present situation, I think we need to face the reality of who sent them there.
Considering that in a survey last october 96% of people say they favor background checks for all purchases, 75% a 30 day waiting period and 70% that all privately-owned guns be registered I question whether politicians actually do represent us.
http://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
Considering that in a survey last october 96% of people say they favor background checks for all purchases, 75% a 30 day waiting period and 70% that all privately-owned guns be registered I question whether politicians actually do represent us.
http://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
But most of us don't vote based on single issues as measured by polls taken six months ago. For the most part, we vote out of habit or identification with a particular party or candidate. Sometimes, as with Trump, some of vote us out of spite. Some vote to "shake things up" out of pure boredom.
You can blame Fox News or the Russians or "the Rich" or hypocritical Christians or racists or patriarchs or lefty snowflakes or poor parenting or rampant political correctness fascism or omnipotent Big Data sorcery, but in the end each of us is free to vote his choice (or neglect voting at all) as he sees fit.
If we are brought to a choice of two types of liar, if our clowns become pundits and our pundits clowns, if we decide the people who disagree with us are idiots and liars, than the real fault lies with our own ignorance and neglect, not some designated scapegoat.
If a sungle puppy dying in an overhead bin of an airplane can stir congress to rapid action but dozens of dead children can’t, despite overwhelong support for a commonsense reform it seems pretty clear that the problem isnt that vioters don't care. It seems much more likely that the gun lobby has more power to thwart congress from carrying out the people’s wishes than the ‘i like dead puppies on planes’ lobby.
The phrase “common sense reform” is full of nonsense.
iris lilies
4-2-18, 3:42pm
If a sungle puppy dying in an overhead bin of an airplane can stir congress to rapid action but dozens of dead children can’t, despite overwhelong support for a commonsense reform it seems pretty clear that the problem isnt that vioters don't care. It seems much more likely that the gun lobby has more power to thwart congress from carrying out the people’s wishes than the ‘i like dead puppies on planes’ lobby.
wait, has Congress actually passed legislation against another bad thing happening, like dead dogs?
Oh they are so resourceful at saving us from the bad stuff of the world.
Fools. they are a bunch of idiots and fools. I tire of their stupidity.
Considering that in a survey last october 96% of people say they favor background checks for all purchases, 75% a 30 day waiting period and 70% that all privately-owned guns be registered I question whether politicians actually do represent us.
http://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
I’d have to question that poll some, I’m not saying that a majority might favor background checks, but not 96%. Of coarse the latest polls also put trumps approval rating above Obama’s for the sameness time in office. I’m sure you believe that also.
Here is that link. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_apr02
The phrase “common sense reform” is full of nonsense.
No moreso than the NRA’s extremist interpretation of the second amendment.
No moreso than the NRA’s extremist interpretation of the second amendment.
I'm not sure what the NRA's interpretation might be, what do you consider extremist?
I’ve been thinking of giving my grandkids a life membership to the NRA. I don’t view them as extreme. And they give a jacket for signing up and I’m keeping that for myself.
You can always send some money to Bloomberg and while he’s at it he can get back to fighting soft drinks.
Im sure both groups are gaining membership and contributions.
I'm not sure what the NRA's interpretation might be, what do you consider extremist?
Ignoring the first 13 words.
The phrase “common sense reform” is full of nonsense.
I always want to ask people who want "common sense gun law reform" how they'd feel about common sense abortion reform or common sense free speech reform or common sense labor law reform.
I always want to ask people who want "common sense gun law reform" how they'd feel about common sense abortion reform or common sense free speech reform or common sense labor law reform.
I suppose if we were talking about specific labor law or abortion or speech reforms, in a way similar to how i was dscussing a specific potential gun law reform we could decide whether the proposed reforms could be characterized as common sense or not. My gut instinct, though, is that if any off your proposed reforms for the above polled at 96% approval they’d probably be pretty common sense.
I'm not sure what the NRA's interpretation might be, what do you consider extremist?
Ignoring the first 13 words.
I think those first 13 words are well settled.
According to Wikipedia:
In District of Columbia v. Heller (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller)(2008), the Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court_decisions_in_the_United_Sta tes#The_right_of_the_people_to_keep_and_bear_arms) that held the amendment protects an individual right to possess and carry firearms.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution #cite_note-scotus1-14)[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution #cite_note-15)
In McDonald v. Chicago (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._Chicago) (2010), the Court clarified its earlier decisions that limited the amendment's impact to a restriction on the federal government, expressly holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment against state and local governments.[16] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution #cite_note-nytimes.com-16)
In Caetano v. Massachusetts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caetano_v._Massachusetts)(2016), the Supreme Court reiterated its earlier rulings that "the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding" and that its protection is not limited to "only those weapons useful in warfare".[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution #cite_note-Liptak-17)
So, given such a solid basis for the NRA's advocacy to retain settled rights, I'm still curious why anyone would use the word "extremist".
flowerseverywhere
4-3-18, 5:40pm
Another shooting at YouTube. First reports woman was the shooter. Interesting huh? More dead bodies guns didn’t kill.
ToomuchStuff
4-4-18, 10:21am
Another shooting at YouTube. First reports woman was the shooter. Interesting huh? More dead bodies guns didn’t kill.
Bodies last I checked meant more then one. Three wounded, one (the shooter) dead. Not the same style weapon (a pistol), in a gun free zone again, and last report I saw, said it was a domestic dispute (one man, two women wounded).
So no, the gun didn't decide to take itself in there and open fire, someone who could have used a knife, a backpack bomb, their vehicle, or a pressure cooker did.
Now there've been reports that it wasn't a domestic dispute but rather, that she was angry at youtube's demonitization of a lot of amateur channels such as hers.
I think those first 13 words are well settled.
According to Wikipedia:
So, given such a solid basis for the NRA's advocacy to retain settled rights, I'm still curious why anyone would use the word "extremist".[/LEFT]
I suppose those 3 recent court decisions have, for better or for worse, settled the issue. Just as, for better or for worse, the court has also decided that commerce is pretty much anything congress calls it.
I am, though, somewhat surprised that conservatives would be in favor of this relatively recent interpretation of the second amendment. It wasn't until the '60's when the black panthers used this interpretation to justify carrying shotguns while monitoring police in Oakland and then went to the statehouse in Sacramento carrying guns that people seriously started considering the concept that the amendment was ascribing an individual right to bear arms instead of a collective right to bear arms.
http://www.radiolab.org/story/radiolab-presents-more-perfect-gun-show/
dado potato
4-12-18, 7:17pm
In Rhode Island the House Judiciary Committee approved 2 bills which would ban bump stocks and implement a "red flag" policy, whereby police can obtain a court order to confiscate firearms from individual the court deems to be a threat of imminent harm to themselves or others. They are expected to pass the House and Senate and become law.
The Governor of Vermont has signed into law 2 measures of the same effect, as well as raising the age to buy a gun from 16 to 21, banning high-capacity magazines, and making background checks mandatory on all firearms sales.
flowerseverywhere
4-12-18, 8:58pm
They passed such a law in Florida. It was shocking it passed in this red, easy to get concealed carry license state. There are two shooting ranges with classes within five miles from my house.
Now the task task is to ensure this law is only used in extreme circumstances. We have our share of crazies, especially old ones, in this heavily gun filled state. I think the legislation is good, but only if used properly.
dado potato
4-13-18, 11:55pm
A Pennsylvania school district is taking "aggressive measures to improve safety and security."
Millcreek Township School District is training all teachers in the T.R.O.J.A.N. response to a threat. District Superintendent Hall issued 16"-long wooden bats to 500 teachers during training on April 9. An additional 100 bats will be maintained in school offices and other school locations. Hall stated, "Teachers will have the option to use the bats if a threat arises.... it's not about just hiding and waiting. There are options, and one of those is to fight."
The local newspaper reported that the bats cost about $1,800.
There will also be a greater presence of armed police officers in the schools.
https://www.mtsd.org/featured-news/message-from-superintendent-william-hall
A Pennsylvania school district is taking "aggressive measures to improve safety and security."
Millcreek Township School District is training all teachers in the T.R.O.J.A.N. response to a threat. District Superintendent Hall issued 16"-long wooden bats to 500 teachers during training on April 9. An additional 100 bats will be maintained in school offices and other school locations. Hall stated, "Teachers will have the option to use the bats if a threat arises.... it's not about just hiding and waiting. There are options, and one of those is to fight."
The local newspaper reported that the bats cost about $1,800.
There will also be a greater presence of armed police officers in the schools.
https://www.mtsd.org/featured-news/message-from-superintendent-william-hall
Sort of reminds me of Catholic school in the sixties.
Sort of reminds me of Catholic school in the sixties.
Haha! I hear ya, LDAHL. I still have PTSD from the treatment I got from Sister Catherina and Sister Ellen Marie, but what didn't kill me made me stronger. If I hadn't had kind, compassionate teachers along the way, too, like Sister Roserma and Sister Theresa Claire, I may never have recovered.
Ultralight
4-14-18, 2:03pm
Haha! I hear ya, LDAHL. I still have PTSD from the treatment I got from Sister Catherina and Sister Ellen Marie, but what didn't kill me made me stronger. If I hadn't had kind, compassionate teachers along the way, too, like Sister Roserma and Sister Theresa Claire, I may never have recovered.
I went to Catholic School for one day. Not a good fit for anyone!
I did have to attend CCD (Catholic Children's Dungeon) every Sunday after church. I am pretty sure a couple nuns and a priest have PTSD from me being unmanageable and all the cognitive dissonance I caused them! haha
ToomuchStuff
4-14-18, 3:53pm
Sitting here thinking that at some point a kid will get a hold of one of those bats, and there will be some assault and "bat" tery pun, while others will start to protest about having bats at school.>8)
Teacher Terry
4-14-18, 5:50pm
What rocket scientist decided that bats were a good defense against guns?
dado potato
4-14-18, 6:06pm
Teacher Terry,
I can imagine an informal debate about this question in the teachers' lounges in that school district: Is it more effective to club a threat over the head with your bat, or to poke him in the eye? <sarcasm>
Teacher Terry
4-14-18, 6:08pm
Thanks for giving me a good laugh:~).
dado potato
5-7-18, 10:02am
In Illinois, local efforts are underway to blunt the effect of any new legislation which may pass regulating bump stocks, high capacity magazines, etc.
In Illinois five county boards passed largely symbolic resolutions declaring themselves "sanctuary counties for gun owners". The County Board of Effingham County, (population 34,000) in southern IL voted 8-1 to bar county employees from enforcing new laws that would violate the right to keep and bear arms.
Fox News reported that the resolutions of Effingham County and 5 other county boards are intended to send a message to the Democratic-controlled legislature in IL: if it passes firearms bills, such as increasing the minimum age for owning a gun or prohibiting a bump stock, these counties will instruct their employees to ignore the new law.
Rex Huppke wrote an op-ed piece in the Chicago Tribune, sarcastically praising the Effingham County Board for its "symbolic and unenforceable resolution that addresses problems that don't exist." Furthermore he urged nervous Illinois gun owners to move to Effingham County. "... For too long, heat-packers have had to live in fear that at any moment the government or a band of raging liberals ... might swoop down and start grabbing all the guns. ...You who have been made to feel uncomfortable because school-shooting survivors have become vocally anti-school shooting, go to Effingham County. ...Go, I say. Your sanctuary awaits."
dado potato
5-7-18, 10:14am
In Deschutes County, Oregon, efforts are underway to put an initiative on the ballot for the November elections, the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance. If passed, the initiative would empower the Sheriff of Deschutes County to determine whether any federal, state or local regulation violates the Constitution. "Any regulation of the right to keep and bear arms or ancillary firearms rights that violate ... the Constitution... shall be regarded by the People on and in Deschutes County as unconstitutional, a transgression of the Supreme Law of the Land and its spirit of Liberty, and therefore by necessity void ab initio"
I understand that backers of the initiative need about 4,100 signatures of county residents by a certain deadline for the initiative to be placed on the ballot.
In Illinois, local efforts are underway to blunt the effect of any new legislation which may pass regulating bump stocks, high capacity magazines, etc.
In Illinois five county boards passed largely symbolic resolutions declaring themselves "sanctuary counties for gun owners". The County Board of Effingham County, (population 34,000) in southern IL voted 8-1 to bar county employees from enforcing new laws would violate the right to keep and bear arms.
That's a perfect illustration of the greatness of America. Much like many urban areas declaring themselves sanctuaries against Federal Immigration laws, rural areas have taken notice and started declaring themselves as sanctuaries against their big city brethren's restriction of their liberties. I love this sort of thing.
It’s amusing, but if we go too far down the path of forming little tribes and nullifying laws we find uncongenial, we wind up like the Balkans. I especially think it’s a bad idea to allow the police the power to interpret the Constitution. That is not to say that an all-powerful central government is the answer.
Apparently the New York Times is upset that the Federal government's recent efforts to finally *prosecute* violations of existing gun laws will:
" sap energy from further legislative or regulatory efforts to combat gun violence, like regulating assault weapons or increasing background check requirements."
And:
"Enforcement isn’t always the solution to those different types of crimes. The result might be to increase the federal prison population without a correlating reduction in crime.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/07/us/politics/jeff-sessions-gun-charges.html
Apparently the New York Times is upset that the Federal government's recent efforts to finally *prosecute* violations of existing gun laws will:
" sap energy from further legislative or regulatory efforts to combat gun violence, like regulating assault weapons or increasing background check requirements."
And:
"Enforcement isn’t always the solution to those different types of crimes. The result might be to increase the federal prison population without a correlating reduction in crime.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/07/us/politics/jeff-sessions-gun-charges.html
So enforcing existing law would sap energy from the effort to pass additional unenforceable laws?
Sounds like a good example of NYT logic.
dado potato
5-11-18, 11:22am
Oliver North, newly appointed president of the National Rifle Association, was interviewed by "The Washington Times". As reported by MSN News 5/10/18, North takes umbrage in response to the activism of Parkland survivors. "This kind of thing" North calls "civil terrorism".
According to the MSN account:
Since the 14 February school shooting in Parkland FL that left 17 dead, teenage survivors of the shooting have repeatedly criticized the NRA on Twitter for its decades-long campaign to block stricter gun laws. They have also pushed companies to break ties with the NRA and companies that manufacture military-style weapons.
"They can do all the cyberwar against us -- they're doing it," North said. "They can use the media against us -- they are. They've gone after our bank accounts, our finances, our donors, and obviously individual members. It's got to stop."
early morning
5-11-18, 4:35pm
Ah, Oliver North, traitor extraordinaire - but I guess after Moses, there's nowhere to go but down. . .
flowerseverywhere
5-13-18, 1:59pm
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/05/12/oklahoma-governor-vetoes-bill-aimed-allowing-adults-carry-gun-without-license/604716002/
so one of the reddest states, Oklahoma, wanted to ease gun laws further. Law enforcement was against it. The gov. Vetoed the bill. NRA is pledging to oust her.
I personally trust the boots on the ground who see what goes on in the streets and put their lives in danger over The small percentage of NRA members. I don’t want to take any law abiding citizens guns away, but please let’s listen to what law enforcement has to say.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/05/12/oklahoma-governor-vetoes-bill-aimed-allowing-adults-carry-gun-without-license/604716002/
so one of the reddest states, Oklahoma, wanted to ease gun laws further. Law enforcement was against it. The gov. Vetoed the bill. NRA is pledging to oust her.
I personally trust the boots on the ground who see what goes on in the streets and put their lives in danger over The small percentage of NRA members. I don’t want to take any law abiding citizens guns away, but please let’s listen to what law enforcement has to say.
The state law enforcement agency mentioned said they'd lose $5M annually in licensing fees and would need to lay off 60 personnel if citizens were allowed their full constitutional rights.
I personally trust the boots on the ground who see what goes on in the streets and put their lives in danger over The small percentage of NRA members. I don’t want to take any law abiding citizens guns away, but please let’s listen to what law enforcement has to say.
I suppose law enforcement would also have an easier and safer time of it if we did something about the pesky 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments to the Constitution as well....
flowerseverywhere
5-13-18, 8:37pm
I suppose law enforcement would also have an easier and safer time of it if we did something about the pesky 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments to the Constitution as well....
You are not going to die from someone telling you what you don’t want to hear or women voting and so on.
dado potato
5-16-18, 3:21pm
Oregon Initiative Petition #43 will be on the statewide ballot in November. The initiative, if passed, would declare that The people of the State of Oregon find and declare that a reduction in the availability of assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines will promote ... public health and safety.
Section 3 of IP #43 defines "assault weapon" and "large capacity ammunition magazine".
Section 4 makes it a crime to unlawfully possess or transfer an assault weapon or high capacity magazine, effective January 1, 2019. People who legally owned such items before the law goes into effect would be allowed to apply for registration, subject to a criminal background check. I understand that registered owners would be restricted to possession (and transport) on their own property or a shooting range. They would be required to report theft of any of the registered items within 48 hours. They would not be allowed to buy more assault weapons and large capacity magazines.
Owners who do not apply for registration will have 120 days to remove the unlawful items from the state of Oregon, sell them to a registered firearms dealer, surrender them to law enforcement for destruction, or render them inoperable.
I expect there will be a lively debate between supporters and opponents of the initiative.
Registration of “such items”. I just checked - I have hundreds of such things. My FAL magazines were purchased by the 500 magazine case, for $1.25/magazine.
Since they lack serial numbers, how exactly will such things be registered? How much will it cost me to register my $1.25 item?
The links for my Browning machine guns - when I link too many of them together, do I need to register the assembly? See they unlink when fired, am I manufacturing a new unlawful item when I pick them up and reassemble them? The cloth belts for the same weapons....if I cut them into shorter lengths, am I OK? If I sew a strip of cloth with too many loops, am I a criminal?
Come and get ‘em....
I see the cop who loitered outside the building during the Parkland shooting is collecting a pension of $8,702/month at the age of 55. Maybe he could retire to Oregon. Less chance of gunfire and you still don't need to pump your own gas in the bigger towns.
Teacher Terry
5-16-18, 5:22pm
Why do you need a machine gun? Is it an antique you keep for sentimental reasons?
Why do you need a machine gun? Is it an antique you keep for sentimental reasons?
Need has really nothing to do with it. I collect most examples of John M. Browning’s firearms designs, as a gunsmith and as a matter of engineering, technological, and historical interest.
dado potato
5-16-18, 7:35pm
I believe the genius and industry of John M. Browning is to be admired. 128 firearms patents. The Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) has been instrumental in winning wars in the capable hands of the US Army and USMC.
As I understand the Oregon Initiative, a collector of firearms who lawfully obtained a BAR prior to 1/1/2019 would be able to register it with the State of Oregon (subject to a criminal background check), or to sell it to a registered firearms dealer. Some aspects of registration may be comedic. But the registered owner of a BAR would still be able to fire-away on a rifle range or his/her own private property.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtx12dzs5n8
dado potato
5-16-18, 10:06pm
Earlier in this space I had quoted lyrics of a song that was recorded in the early 70s. It spoke of violent fantasies involving a BAR in an urban setting. I decided to delete it because it contained offensive language, and it does not pertain directly to the present topic, which is the aftermath of the Parkland FL shooting incident.
flowerseverywhere
5-17-18, 11:13am
Registration of “such items”. I just checked - I have hundreds of such things. My FAL magazines were purchased by the 500 magazine case, for $1.25/magazine.
Since they lack serial numbers, how exactly will such things be registered? How much will it cost me to register my $1.25 item?
The links for my Browning machine guns - when I link too many of them together, do I need to register the assembly? See they unlink when fired, am I manufacturing a new unlawful item when I pick them up and reassemble them? The cloth belts for the same weapons....if I cut them into shorter lengths, am I OK? If I sew a strip of cloth with too many loops, am I a criminal?
Come and get ‘em....
you are precisely the kind of person that these laws will hurt and not protect anyone. Our population is 325million in the US and there are approx 17,000 murders, so the very large majority of people mean no harm unless attacked. But for some reason making everyone pay is often a feel good solution.
My bags are searched and I go through a metal detector before i I go on a plane, into the senate office building and so on. However I have no means or intent to harm anyone. 3% of planned parenthood procedures are abortion, yet the call to shut them down and the huge amount of STD testing and treatment, birth control, cancer screenings and so on are not duplicated elsewhere. What is fair and reasonable in circumstances like this?
Earlier in this space I had quoted lyrics of a song that was recorded in the early 70s. It spoke of violent fantasies involving a BAR in an urban setting.
I think the last time a BAR was used in criminal activity by non-state-actors was Bonnie and Clyde, which led directly to the Gun Control Act of 1934, commonly referred to as the "National Firearms Act", which the NRA sponsored, which established the regulatory framework for machine guns and other such things.
I have sitting in front of me right now a cloth belt for a Browning M1919 machine gun, used to feed ammunition into the firearm. It is a simple cotton strap, with loops sewn into it. It holds 250 rounds of ammunition. You can cut and trim it to whatever smaller size you want.
So, if I drive into California with a cotton strap with 10 loops, all is good. If it has 11 loops sewn into it, I'm committing a felony in California. (I don't go to California much these days...)
Earlier in this space I had quoted lyrics of a song that was recorded in the early 70s. It spoke of violent fantasies involving a BAR in an urban setting. I decided to delete it because it contained offensive language, and it does not pertain directly to the present topic, which is the aftermath of the Parkland FL shooting incident.
But it did tell a fictional story of a violent person with a fictional BAR threatening innocents and dreaming of violence and war in all its glory, and at least 60 of us had the opportunity to visualize its setting and message before it was removed for "offensive language", so, well done.
ToomuchStuff
5-18-18, 9:04am
Earlier in this space I had quoted lyrics of a song that was recorded in the early 70s. It spoke of violent fantasies involving a BAR in an urban setting. I decided to delete it because it contained offensive language, and it does not pertain directly to the present topic, which is the aftermath of the Parkland FL shooting incident.
I tend to think about a popular song about a school shooting in the 70's by the Boomtown Rats. Heck, there are several school shooting songs.
dado potato
5-18-18, 11:12am
At Santa Fe High School, 36 miles southeast of Houston TX, another school shooting has occurred. The suspect, who is a student, is in custody. Early accounts on the live TV coverage said the shooting began in an art class between 7:30 and 7:45. A teacher pulled a fire alarm. Some students ran for the nearest exits, while others hid in classrooms. The high school has a capacity of 1,400 students. At least 3 students were fatalities and one law enforcement officer was injured. The shooter was reportedly armed with a shotgun.
The students who ran out of the school were rounded up by law enforcement, searched, and transported in school buses to a gymnasium. Parents were directed to the gymnasium to pick up their children and "sign them out".
Likewise, students who remained sheltered in classrooms were escorted out to waiting buses by law enforcement.
dado potato
5-18-18, 1:31pm
Later reports were that one suspect was arrested and a second was in custody... the death toll was 10 (and could rise to 13) including students and staff of the Santa Fe High School. The shooter reportedly was armed with shotgun, pistol, an AR-15 style rifle and pipe bombs.
The schools need a separate alarm for a shooter. This is all so disgusting and intolerable.
dado potato
5-18-18, 3:53pm
On February 21, one week after the 2/14/18 Parkland shootings, President Trump, along with VP Pence and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, met in the White House with survivors of the Parkland shooting incident, as well as families of the 17 murdered Parkland students and faculty. Also in attendance were families representing the dead students of Columbine (1999) and Sandy Hook Elementary (2012).
President Trump said, "We want to learn everything we can. Starting about 2 minutes after this meeting we are going to work. We don't want others to go through the kind of pain that you've gone through. It wouldn't be right..."
VP Pence stated at the outset of the listening session that the administration would make school safety the administration's top priority.
Andrew Pollock, whose 18-year-old daughter was murdered in the Parkland shooting incident, denounced the lack of effective response since Columbine. "It doesn't make sense. Fix it! There should have been one school shooting. We should have fixed it. And I am pissed. Because my daughter is in the cemetery..."
A Parkland survivor asked, "How many children have to get shot?"
President Trump promised, "We're going to get it done. It's not going to be talk like it was in the past."
flowerseverywhere
5-18-18, 4:24pm
Dado they sent thoughts and prayers. Not enough?
Baldilocks
5-18-18, 4:32pm
I'm going to say something unpopular but first, my deepest symphthy to everyone affected. In my opinion, this isn't a political problem, it's a spiritual one. The bible says the thief (satan) comes to steel, kill and destroy. Everyone wants peace, but no one wants the Prince of peace (Jesus). When satan temped Jesus, he took him on top of a mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the earth and told him he could have all of it if he would bow down and worship him. He couldn't have offered it if it wasn't his. We live in a sinful, depraved, fallen world. And the only cure for that is a sinless resurrected Savior. God sometimes works thru people, unfortunatly so does satan. You can't fix a spiritual problem with a earthly solution.
Teacher Terry
5-18-18, 7:17pm
There is a earthly solution but unfortunately NRA and other powerful people/corporations own our spineless politicians. We could have solved this problem a long time ago. This won't be popular either.
There is a earthly solution but unfortunately NRA and other powerful people/corporations own our spineless politicians. We could have solved this problem a long time ago. This won't be popular either.Really? How could this problem have been solved?
dado potato
5-18-18, 8:00pm
Baldilocks,
Gun violence indeed may be a problem with a spiritual aspect. Often the shooter is a young male who has experienced shaming, without having developed a coping mechanism to compensate for the pain. I would not rule out religion as a potential coping mechanism. To any one who prays with intention, I would request your prayers.
At the same time, we can strive energetically (work) to eliminate gun violence in schools.
The two methods by which we are allowed to produce events may be called work and prayer. -- C. S. "Jack" Lewis (1898-1963)
Baldilocks
5-18-18, 10:14pm
[QUOTE=dado potato;297205]
Gun violence indeed may be a problem with a spiritual aspect.
It's not the gun. The old testament teaches we aren't suppose to murder. Jesus teaches we arn't suppose to be angry with our brother. Without the anger, there isn't murder.
If everyone believed “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” the whole world could be filled with guns and it would not be a problem.
Someone in my town intentionally ran over a person with his car. So the absence of the gun didn't make a difference. The only thing that can defeat hate is love, and God is Love.
Ultralight
5-18-18, 10:17pm
[QUOTE=dado potato;297205]
Gun violence indeed may be a problem with a spiritual aspect.
It's not the gun. The old testament teaches we aren't suppose to murder. Jesus teaches we arn't suppose to be angry with our brother. Without the anger, there isn't murder.
If everyone believed “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” the whole world could be filled with guns and it would not be a problem.
Someone in my town intentionally ran over a person with his car. So the absence of the gun didn't make a difference. The only thing that can defeat hate is love, and God is Love.
Do you know how many people have been killed and murdered in the name of Christianity? Remember The Crusades?
Really? How could this problem have been solved?
Thoughts and prayers. I’m surprised they havent been suggested before.
Dado they sent thoughts and prayers. Not enough?
I find it amusing that so many people who sneer so vehemently at thoughts and prayers put such faith in the mystical power of a few more laws as a sort of road to redemption.
[QUOTE=Baldilocks;297223]
Do you know how many people have been killed and murdered in the name of Christianity? Remember The Crusades?
I often hear the breaking news of 1099 brought up as some sort of argument that invalidates Christianity, but I’m not sure that is any more logical than claiming Harvey Weinstein invalidated the feminism he so often avowed.
Thoughts and prayers. I’m surprised they havent been suggested before.It may not help but it certainly wouldn't hurt, so odds are it would be a good thing.
flowerseverywhere
5-19-18, 6:18pm
I find it amusing that so many people who sneer so vehemently at thoughts and prayers put such faith in the mystical power of a few more laws as a sort of road to redemption. I find nothing amusing about it. If there is a God, why in the world would he help us if we cannot help ourselves? If you read one of Bae’s recent posts, he pointed out almost half of households,can’t afford to meet their basic needs. We have a growing homeless population. Millions of Christians defend a president who routinely lies, ridicules, calls people names, has beeen divorced twice, brags about pussy grabbing and pays off porn stars. He has the support of the Evangelicals. We stand idly by while the homeless population grows every day, while the rich get richer. We can’t even figure out how to prevent massacres which happen multiple times each month. And I forgot we tolerate in our society a faction that called Newton a fake set-up, ( the victims parents are still being harassed) the Parklandd students crisis actors and Don’t have decent schools for all our kids. Detroit poisoned it’s citizens. Church and legislative scandals abound. Payoffs, bribes, sexual harassment, you name it, we got it in spades.
God must have tears of sorrow at what we have become. Maybe we ought to become a better society instead of the hateful, selfish society we are. Because hollow prayers and thoughts just are not cutting it.
Ultralight
5-19-18, 6:54pm
[QUOTE=Ultralight;297224]
I often hear the breaking news of 1099 brought up as some sort of argument that invalidates Christianity, but I’m not sure that is any more logical than claiming Harvey Weinstein invalidated the feminism he so often avowed.
Uh... feminism and Harvey are not divine, as Christianity supposedly is.
It may not help but it certainly wouldn't hurt, so odds are it would be a good thing.
It hasn't helped the last 230 times, so I'm pretty sure it's not going to this time around. After all, what's that cliched definition of insanity... Maybe it's time to try something different because I think a lot of people are tired of thinking about the fact that we live in a country where more school children this year have been killed than members of the military.
And hopefully we can do better than the Texas Lt. Governor's suggestion that we just need to ban doors...
Ultralight
5-19-18, 9:20pm
It hasn't helped the last 230 times, so I'm pretty sure it's not going to this time around. After all, what's that cliched definition of insanity... Maybe it's time to try something different because I think a lot of people are tired of thinking about the fact that we live in a country where more school children this year have been killed than members of the military.
When you start pointing out to religious people that their prayers don't work then you are really going to piss some people off. Bravo!
Ultralight
5-19-18, 9:23pm
It hasn't helped the last 230 times, so I'm pretty sure it's not going to this time around. After all, what's that cliched definition of insanity... Maybe it's time to try something different because I think a lot of people are tired of thinking about the fact that we live in a country where more school children this year have been killed than members of the military.
Also, when you point things like this out to GOPers it is like punching a brick wall. They start chanting: "More guns good, gun laws bad."
When you guys are through pointing fingers at the bogeyman du jour and are ready to discuss helpful options, let us know.
Ultralight
5-19-18, 9:49pm
When you guys are through pointing fingers at the bogeyman du jour and are ready to discuss helpful options, let us know.
Turn the schools into totalitarian states. It will keep the kids physically safe. I already mentioned this.
ToomuchStuff
5-19-18, 10:47pm
Turn the schools into totalitarian states. It will keep the kids physically safe. I already mentioned this.
Safety went up in my local school when they eliminated the metal detectors.
flowerseverywhere
5-20-18, 1:38am
When you guys are through pointing fingers at the bogeyman du jour and are ready to discuss helpful options, let us know.
There are none as long as our gun culture exists. It is more than just gun ownership. 420 responses and thoughts and prayers seems to be the best we can come up with?
[QUOTE=LDAHL;297261]
Uh... feminism and Harvey are not divine, as Christianity supposedly is.
At the risk of answering my own question, where the Hell did you get that idea?
Christianity, in its many branches, is composed of flawed and fallible human material. It aims at reaching toward the divine with the humble recognition that such imperfect beings as we can never succeed absent a certain amount of grace putting a thumb on the scale. Nobody in history has ever gotten it completely right. It's the striving that matters. It's like Candy Crush in that respect.
I don't think that pointing at Christians falling short of an ideal is dispositive proof of the ideal's validity.
Teacher Terry
5-20-18, 3:28pm
flowers, I totally agree with your post yesterday:)) It is really sad what is happening in our country.
flowerseverywhere
5-20-18, 4:39pm
[QUOTE=Ultralight;297297]
At the risk of answering my own question, where the Hell did you get that idea?
Christianity, in its many branches, is composed of flawed and fallible human material. It aims at reaching toward the divine with the humble recognition that such imperfect beings as we can never succeed absent a certain amount of grace putting a thumb on the scale. Nobody in history has ever gotten it completely right. It's the striving that matters. It's like Candy Crush in that respect.
I don't think that pointing at Christians falling short of an ideal is dispositive proof of the ideal's validity.
all ideologies and beliefs are not perfect. It’s just that if you are willing to judge and label others don’t be surprised when they fight back.
Standing behind an organization that pays large large sums of money to politicians to back their pro gun at any cost agenda is risky for Christians at best. What would Jesus do?
blocking all Muslims from entering the country, spreading a wave of hate, white supremacy and antisemitism? What would Jesus do?
Treat sexually active women as whores because they seek birth control and health services while multiple legislators haven’t kept their hands and other body parts between themselves and their legally married partner? Doing anything to block poor women of reproductive age from obtaining testing and health care?
Touting the the evils of abortion while our children are being slaughtered by guns in schools, failing in schools, many are homeless and hungry and 65 million refugees are languishing around the world in tent cities with no hope for any country taking them? Let’s start by taking care of the people in this country at least, and finding ways to let them help themselves. That would truly be the Christian thing to do.
It just does does not make sense what is going on in our “Christian” country.
dado potato
5-20-18, 5:36pm
In my garden these flowers blossomed on the day of the Santa Fe High School shooting incident. They live in the cold highlands, in rocky soil.
2198
flowerseverywhere
5-20-18, 6:50pm
In my garden these flowers blossomed on the day of the Santa Fe High School shooting incident. They live in the cold highlands, in rocky soil.
2198
beautiful flowers. On the day of the shooting I sat outside and watched the monarchs on my milkweed, baby ducks and Sandhills cranes, and a young alligator swimming around. I could not turn on the TV.
Ultralight
5-21-18, 6:44am
I think everyone wants an easy way to fix this problem, especially Alan, apparently.
But changing the USA's insane gun culture is going to be no easy task with no one solution. It is going to require a great deal of effort and reach.
I think everyone wants an easy way to fix this problem, especially Alan, apparently.
But changing the USA's insane gun culture is going to be no easy task with no one solution. It is going to require a great deal of effort and reach.
I don't think there is an easy fix as I think this is a multi-faceted societal problem. Those who hope for an easy fix are the ones blaming guns and the NRA and constantly referring to those who disagree with them as gun nuts.
I've come to believe that further discussion on the subject with 'easy fixers' is pointless.
flowerseverywhere
5-21-18, 8:20am
I don't think there is an easy fix as I think this is a multi-faceted societal problem. Those who hope for an easy fix are the ones blaming guns and the NRA and constantly referring to those who disagree with them as gun nuts.
I've come to believe that further discussion on the subject with 'easy fixers' is pointless.
what are the solutions?
it is a very complicated solution, I agree. But there must be a way to start.
First, what laws are not enforced already on the books?
Ultralight
5-21-18, 5:48pm
I don't think there is an easy fix as I think this is a multi-faceted societal problem. Those who hope for an easy fix are the ones blaming guns and the NRA and constantly referring to those who disagree with them as gun nuts.
I've come to believe that further discussion on the subject with 'easy fixers' is pointless.
Okay, thanks for clarifying. Calling this a multi-faceted society problem is right.
I call the gun nuts gun nuts and I call the gun grabbers gun grabbers. ;)
ApatheticNoMore
5-21-18, 7:08pm
easy fixers are focusing on what they see as actually doable though. "We have to change the entire of U.S. society" makes one well not a pragmatist anyway. yea, yea, even if there is some truth to it. Gun control has worked some places like Australia with somewhat similar societies (ex-british afterall). But very different societies do handle things differently - I just don't' see any path here to there though.
Interesting outlook by Malcolm Gladwell:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence
and good commentary on it:
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/why-do-mass-shootings-happen-best-explanation/
ApatheticNoMore
5-24-18, 3:02pm
reading Crime and Punishment (Dostoevsky) in high school, and as required reading too, was almost more than my poor teenage mind could take.
Ultralight
5-24-18, 6:02pm
So get this.
My buddy from the old neighborhood, the one with all the alcohol and lifestyle problems got into a real fracas last Sunday. Some of his house guests (local junkies) had a go with some of the other neighbors.
Knives were pulled and put to people's throats, cars were attempted stolen, guns were pulled on people, the EMS was called out, the sheriff was called out, many people were involved in the scuffle and much yelling and threatening happened.
A portion of this was apparently caught on video. I can't wait to see it!
My buddy was eventually charged with "disorderly conduct" and "weapons while intoxicated" (whatever those mean). Anyway, by Monday afternoon he was out having plead no contest. He got a $250 fine (I think his parents paid it). And he also got 2 years of no-check-in probation.
Somehow him pulling a gun on someone whilst he was intoxicated is not enough to revoke his CCW.
This is a no nonsense, easy fix to gun laws. If someone gets a weapons while intoxicated charge they ought to have their CCW frickin' revoked!
This is a no nonsense, easy fix to gun laws. If someone gets a weapons while intoxicated charge they ought to have their CCW frickin' revoked!
https://law.justia.com/codes/ohio/2006/orc/jd_292315-68af.html
http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/getattachment/77958800-9bb6-4df3-b125-34b5442ad2f7/2004-046.aspx
Somehow him pulling a gun on someone whilst he was intoxicated is not enough to revoke his CCW.
This is a no nonsense, easy fix to gun laws. If someone gets a weapons while intoxicated charge they ought to have their CCW frickin' revoked!
Are you sure you know the whole story?
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2923.128
(a) If a licensee holding a valid concealed handgun license is arrested for or otherwise charged with an offense described in division (D)(1)(d) of section 2923.125 (http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2923.125) of the Revised Code or with a violation of section 2923.15 (http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2923.15) of the Revised Code or becomes subject to a temporary protection order or to a protection order issued by a court of another state that is substantially equivalent to a temporary protection order, the sheriff who issued the license shall suspend it and shall comply with division (A)(3) of this section upon becoming aware of the arrest, charge, or protection order. Upon suspending the license, the sheriff also shall comply with division (H) of section 2923.125 (http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2923.125) of the Revised Code.
The referenced ORC 2923.15 deals with Using Weapons While Intoxicated.
Are you sure you know the whole story?
My guess would be that he pled to a lesser charge.
My guess would be that he pled to a lesser charge.
Perhaps, but UL specifically said he was charged with "weapons while intoxicated" and went on to say he pled no contest, then implies that there were no ramifications involving the person's Concealed Carry Permit, further implying that laws are not sufficient to protect the public from his friends irresponsible behavior.
I believe this story was presented incorrectly.
Ultralight
5-24-18, 7:06pm
Perhaps, but UL specifically said he was charged with "weapons while intoxicated" and went on to say he pled no contest, then implies that there were no ramifications involving the person's Concealed Carry Permit, further implying that laws are not sufficient to protect the public from his friends irresponsible behavior.
I believe this story was presented incorrectly.
The newspaper reported the charges.
Ultralight
5-24-18, 7:06pm
My guess would be that he pled to a lesser charge.
Probably.
The newspaper reported the charges.
Did the newspaper also report that despite the charges and subsequent plea he was allowed to keep his concealed carry permit?
You said "Somehow him pulling a gun on someone whilst he was intoxicated is not enough to revoke his CCW" , despite the law being very clear.
Ultralight
5-24-18, 8:13pm
Did the newspaper also report that despite the charges and subsequent plea he was allowed to keep his concealed carry permit?
You said "Somehow him pulling a gun on someone whilst he was intoxicated is not enough to revoke his CCW" , despite the law being very clear.
No, the newspaper did not say that. The "somehow" was likely a plea deal.
Very interesting links to read, Bae. Thanks.
Interesting outlook by Malcolm Gladwell:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence
and good commentary on it:
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/why-do-mass-shootings-happen-best-explanation/
No, the newspaper did not say that. The "somehow" was likely a plea deal.
So, the applicable statute does not require a conviction, but rather just an arrest or charge in order to kick in the requirement that a valid concealed carry weapon permit be revoked. I'm curious to know if his CCW was revoked as the law requires or is there an assumption not based in fact in the story as presented?
I'm asking these questions because I've discovered that we really have to be careful with things we read on the internet. An example being that in the latest school shooting, some news reports, and even one of our members, reported that the shooter used a shotgun, a pistol and an AR15 rifle when there was in fact no AR15 used. I understand the need people have to advance a narrative, I'm trying to understand yours.
Ultralight
5-24-18, 8:57pm
So, the applicable statute does not require a conviction, but rather just an arrest or charge in order to kick in the requirement that a valid concealed carry weapon permit be revoked. I'm curious to know if his CCW was revoked as the law requires or is there an assumption not based in fact in the story as presented?
I'm asking these questions because I've discovered that we really have to be careful with things we read on the internet. An example being that in the latest school shooting, some news reports, and even one of our members, reported that the shooter used a shotgun, a pistol and an AR15 rifle when there was in fact no AR15 used. I understand the need people have to advance a narrative, I'm trying to understand yours.
The newspaper said he was charged with "weapons while intoxicated."
ApatheticNoMore
5-25-18, 7:49am
Very interesting links to read, Bae. Thanks.
only does the influence of American culture/news really stop at the physical borders, I mean the whole world hears of this news. But the shootings don't seem to travel much beyond U.S. borders.
Teacher Terry
5-25-18, 1:35pm
That's because of the gun control laws that many other countries have. People don't have access to AR-15's.
That's because of the gun control laws that many other countries have. People don't have access to AR-15's.
What's the practical difference between an AR-15 and the following semi-automatic rifles available in Canada without restrictions?
https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Norinco-M14S-Shorty-600x152.jpg (https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/norinco-m305-short-review/)https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/FG542.jpg (http://www.tacticalimports.ca/sg-542-p-232.html)
https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/IWI-Tavor-700x230.jpg (https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/iwi-tavor-review/)https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/JR-Carbine-9mm-right-side-600x190.jpg (https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/jr-carbine-review/)
https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/T97-right-hand-side-600x172.jpg (https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/norinco-type-97-review/)https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/WR762-Rifle-700x200.jpg (https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/wr762-review-canadian-vz58cz858/)
https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/BCL102-700x284.jpg (https://www.theammosource.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=7712&language=en)https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Chinese-Type-81-1-700x195.jpg (https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/type-81-review/)
https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Robinson-Arms-XCR-700x154.jpg (https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/robinson-xcr-l-review/)https://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Ruger-Mini-14-700x159.jpg (https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/classic-ruger-mini-14-review/)
What's the practical difference between an AR-15 and the following semi-automatic rifles available in Canada without restrictions?
Frustratingly, though some of the nicer ones of those are for sale at great prices in a gunstore in Canada just a few miles from my house, I am not allowed to buy one and bring it home, because the one I want is made with parts from some country the USA is grumpy with. So instead of $400 Canadian (which is what, $37 US?), I have to pay $2400 for the nearly-identical item, made with all-US parts....
Frustratingly, though some of the nicer ones of those are for sale at great prices in a gunstore in Canada just a few miles from my house, I am not allowed to buy one and bring it home, because the one I want is made with parts from some country the USA is grumpy with. So instead of $400 Canadian (which is what, $37 US?), I have to pay $2400 for the nearly-identical item, made with all-US parts....
Bae, the exchange rate is bad but not that bad. Try US$310.;) Could not resist. But remember, you are making America great again:devil:
[/B]
Bae, the exchange rate is bad but not that bad. Try US$310.;) Could not resist. But remember, you are making America great again:devil:
One of the things I want is a lovely bolt-action rifle from Australia. Unfortunately it has a stock made of hardwood from A Country The USA Hates, and it is prohibited to import weapons parts from Such Naughty Countries. Foolish rules.
Also, sometimes that store has great prices on ammunition. Unfortunately, about 96 pages of forms have to be filled out and an import permit issued before I can bring it back into the USA, which takes about 6 months. Regulations are so much fun.
Teacher Terry
5-25-18, 7:00pm
Another school shooting today:(
dado potato
5-25-18, 7:32pm
Yes, the Noblesville IN incident today was at least the 21st school shooting in 2018. The youth with 2 handguns shot a female student. He was tackled by a science teacher, who he shot three times.
Ultralight
5-26-18, 6:38am
Ain't that America?
dado potato
5-26-18, 10:20am
Ken Paxton, the Attorney General of Texas, wrote an op-ed piece for USA Today.
He argues that US schools lack security measures of any consequence, and a good example of school security is Israel.
He states that in Israel every school with 100 or more students has at least one well-armed and highly trained guard at the entrance. The initial training is rigorous -- only 6 in 10 applicants are able to meet the required standards. There is also an ongoing retraining cycle which requires requalification every 4 months.
School staff and students are trained and drilled on how to respond to a threat.
The schools in the USA should be hardened as targets by:
Reducing the number of entrances, so that each entrance can be guarded.
Installing metal detectors (similar to those that are used in courthouses and government buildings).
Upgrading classroom doors, so that each room can be barricaded from within.
Paxton does not see the usefulness of gun control in response to the problem of gun violence in schools.
His argument does not address the legal responsibility of parents for the criminal behavior of their children using firearms that were legally owned by those parents (maybe not locked in a gun safe), or gifted to their children.
Teacher Terry
5-27-18, 3:19pm
WE will either turn our schools into prisons like Israel or we will have gun control like many European countries and Australia. Who is even going to want to work in schools anymore or send their kids there?
WE will either turn our schools into prisons like Israel or we will have gun control like many European countries and Australia.
What does gun control look like to you?
dado potato
5-27-18, 6:31pm
US gun control without repeal of the Second Amendment would realistically involve "common sensical" restrictions, such as background checks on firearm buyers, red-flag court-ordered surrender of firearms to law enforcement, bans on ownership of "assault weapons", etc. The US is fairly unique among nations in maintaining a constitutional right to bear arms.
Thinking outside the box, if the American electorate were sufficiently riled up by gun violence to repeal the Second Amendment, then hypothetically gun control in the US (11.96 Total Firearm Related Annual Death Rate per 100,000 Population) could look more like Canada (2.05), Israel (2.09), Australia (2.4), or Switzerland (3.01).
In Israel firearms licenses are distributed to residents, agencies, and organizations by the Ministry of Public Security. "Firearms should only be issued if there is a personal or public need, as decided by the authorities, and only to one who adheres to the necessary requirements and has completed the appropriate training." All applicants are interviewed at the firearms licensing bureau. All applicants must complete training at a shooting range. Licenses are granted for a limited term. License holders must renew their license before it expires.
US gun control without repeal of the Second Amendment would realistically involve "common sensical" restrictions, such as ... bans on ownership of "assault weapons",
What is "common sensical" about banning "assault weapons"?
Teacher Terry
5-29-18, 7:25pm
So do some of you think that if your own government/military decides to turn on it's people that the guns you keep at home are really going to protect you?
So do some of you think that if your own government/military decides to turn on it's people that the guns you keep at home are really going to protect you?
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." ~Tench Coxe, 20 Feb 1788
I think this is the point. A people can never be free if their government restrains their natural right to self defense. The fact that their odds aren't stellar if the government turns against them doesn't change the nature, or importance, of their liberty. You may feel free to abdicate yours but I think it's the height of arrogance to expect me to abdicate mine.
While I would agree that it's a noble idea that people should be able to defend themselves against a tyrannical government I think Teacher Terry's questions still stands. We've seen in Philadelphia in the 80's and Waco a decade later what level the government will go to when they decide that people need to be taken down. Is there actually any real chance of the people of the US winning an armed conflict against our government?
What form do you see this "conflict" taking?
It would be a handgun against a tank. Who are we kidding.
iris lilies
5-30-18, 9:12am
It would be a handgun against a tank. Who are we kidding.
I think you do not i derstand potential tyranny of local government, police, and the like.
Teacher Terry
5-30-18, 10:54am
They would just bomb us with drones.
I think you do not i derstand potential tyranny of local government, police, and the like.
When black people in Oakland tried to stand up to the tyranny of their local police back in the 60's the laws regarding what guns could be owned and where they could be taken by their owners got changed. Quickly. The potential tyranny is real but if people somehow think they're going to win that fight I'd say they are foolish. If need be the local police will simply drop bombs and burn down dozens of houses to get their desired result:
https://www.nytimes.com/1985/05/14/us/police-drop-bomb-on-radicals-home-in-philadelphia.html
When black people in Oakland tried to stand up to the tyranny of their local police back in the 60's the laws regarding what guns could be owned and where they could be taken by their owners got changed. Quickly. The potential tyranny is real but if people somehow think they're going to win that fight I'd say they are foolish. If need be the local police will simply drop bombs and burn down dozens of houses to get their desired result:
https://www.nytimes.com/1985/05/14/us/police-drop-bomb-on-radicals-home-in-philadelphia.html
I was just going to go there--what if people rose up against rogue police who seemingly can kill random blacks with impunity? How would that be met? Armed protest wouldn't stand a chance against an increasingly militarized police force. Who are we kidding...
dado potato
5-30-18, 12:37pm
Ramona Africa, the sole adult occupant of the bombed house in Philadelphia who got out alive, was arrested and went to prison until about 1992.
Her first speech after her release from prison can be seen at the linked website, headed 1992
http://onamove.com/ramona-africa
At that time (26 years ago) she said she was still a "true revolutionary" … "Revolution don't have to be violent." … Pressure (such as fear of riot) is why the system appeases inmates, and minorities generally.
Incidentally last night MSNBC aired a townhall on "Everyday Racism in America" in Philadelphia, at the Prince Theater. In the discussion, I noted an observation that "white discomfort" (or fear of street crime) can readily result in a call for police to attend. Police response can quickly escalate to overwhelming or even lethal force.
Maybe there is a parallel with fears of gun violence in schools. Do we/they "call the cops" to deal with school bullying? Do we/they, like Israel, decide to hire private security contractors to provide armed guards at the entrances to schools?
Teacher Terry
5-30-18, 12:48pm
I would prefer that we handle it like Australia and other civilized countries do. We can prevent more kids from dying if we have the courage.
I would prefer that we handle it like Australia and other civilized countries do. We can prevent more kids from dying if we have the courage.Australia first introduced gun controls in order to limit their availability to the criminal classes imported from England, the Aborigines and poachers, while strengthening the government's monopoly on violence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence), and of course excluding the gentry. All proper statists seem to love the concept.
Teacher Terry
5-30-18, 1:51pm
England and other european countries?
England and other european countries?
Same principles, all going back hundreds of years. The United States was the first country to, in theory, break the trend of complete government control over the masses. Of course this was highly selective even here as it was soon decided that certain classes such as Native and African Americans could not legally own the means of protecting themselves.
What's interesting to me is to see how some things never change, and the sheer volume of people who do not see the parallels.
dado potato
5-30-18, 3:23pm
from The Testing-Tree
In a murderous time
the heart breaks and breaks
and lives by breaking.
It is necessary to let go
through dark and deeper dark
and not to turn.
-- Stanley Kunitz (1905-2006)
It would be a handgun against a tank. Who are we kidding.
Might be a bit different...
"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
History records that didn't work so well for the inhabitants of the Warsaw ghetto--it just forestalled the inevitable.
History records that didn't work so well for the inhabitants of the Warsaw ghetto--it just forestalled the inevitable.Given the choice of dying as part of an organized resistance or as a helpless slave at Treblinka, I think they made the right choice.
History records that didn't work so well for the inhabitants of the Warsaw ghetto--it just forestalled the inevitable.
Dying is inevitable under any circumstances. Isn’t fighting back, however long the odds, preferable to passive submission? What would you have done in that situation? Convene a restorative justice commission?
Dying is inevitable under any circumstances. Isn’t fighting back, however long the odds, preferable to passive submission? What would you have done in that situation? Convene a restorative justice commission?
I suppose dying quickly is preferable to long miserable death by forced labor and starvation.
I’m not to worried about our government. But I am conserned with some of the people. I live in a area that has been hit by hurricanes, and during that time you really can’t count on anyone helping you if after the stores have been cleaned out the thugs start looking at the affluent neighborhoods.
But if the gun control people want to turn any weapons they may have over to the government, they are free to do so. I really don’t see any way, at least in my lifetime. That the government confiscates billions of dollars of voters personal property. They can’t even find and get rid of a few million illegal aliens.
Teacher Terry
5-31-18, 10:45am
I guess our kids and teachers will have to be in school/prisons because that seems preferable to many. Makes me glad at this point that I have no grandchildren.
I guess our kids and teachers will have to be in school/prisons because that seems preferable to many. Makes me glad at this point that I have no grandchildren.
Lots of government buildings have security/metal detectors. Why should public schools be different? It seems like a fairly prudent measure to me. I suspect a war on guns would have similar results to the war on drugs.
ToomuchStuff
6-1-18, 1:43am
It would be a handgun against a tank. Who are we kidding.
Afghanistan, and Russia sound familiar?
I’m not to worried about our government. But I am conserned with some of the people. I live in a area that has been hit by hurricanes, and during that time you really can’t count on anyone helping you if after the stores have been cleaned out the thugs start looking at the affluent neighborhoods.
Thank God I have neither guns nor affluence.
I got no lock on the door - that's no way to be
They can steal the rug from the floor - that's OK with me
'Cause the things that I prize - like the stars in the skies - are all free
--Porgy and Bess
flowerseverywhere
6-1-18, 7:48am
Ie was in DC last weekend and I saw more security presence than ever before. I have been there at least four times a year for the past 12 years. Many more men with secret service vests, lines of workers in the AM waiting to go through metal detectors and have their bags searched on the perimeter of buildings. But then again, rich white men (and to a lesser degree, rich white women) are far more valuable to our society than children. Maybe while we are at it any rich white men in jail for white collar crimes like tax evasion, insider trading and the like should get a blanket pardon and be done with it. They are far more valuable on the outside generating more wealth for other rich people than playing tennis and strolling the grounds of minimum security “country club” prisons. Besides, their children can go to elite private schools so they are far safer.
And how does hate for rich white men solve criminals from killing people? Are the majority of gun crimes committed by rich white guys? I’m guessing most is gang related, but that would target another group.
flowerseverywhere
6-1-18, 11:56am
And how does hate for rich white men solve criminals from killing people? Are the majority of gun crimes committed by rich white guys? I’m guessing most is gang related, but that would target another group.
i don’t hate rich white men. I am just realistic they are running the show. Look at say the house intelligence committee. Notice all the white men on it? As well for all the other committees. And the cabinet? Lots of rich white male faces. They are not affected by many of the policies they make like a lot of their constituents
take abortion, planned parenthood funding and access to mammograms and Pap smears. If men were affected by pregnancy and those types of cancers those clinics would be on every corner. Just saying they are out of touch.
And yes, they are responsible for the gun policies in the US. They rule the roost and happily take campaign finance money from the NRA or Pro abortion groups On both sides of the aisle whether or not it benefits normal people.
And yes, they are responsible for the gun policies in the US. They rule the roost and happily take campaign finance money from the NRA or Pro abortion groups On both sides of the aisle whether or not it benefits normal people.
Actually, the US Constitution is responsible for gun policies in the US. "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
I suppose you could blame white men or all men or men of various ethnicities for maintaining your right to the means of self defense, but that may sound too noble for the argument made.
It was privileged white men who wrote the Constitution, after all.
It was privileged white men who wrote the Constitution, after all.
Yes, they were privileged enough to set the stage for the creation of the freest nation on earth, which influenced all other western societies for your eventual benefit. You gotta love em, dontcha?
ApatheticNoMore
6-1-18, 12:37pm
Thank God I have neither guns nor affluence.
I got no lock on the door - that's no way to be
They can steal the rug from the floor - that's OK with me
'Cause the things that I prize - like the stars in the skies - are all free
--Porgy and Bess
although I suspect no locks on the door is often itself an symbol of affluence (or sometimes rural life as well), in a more dangerous neighborhood one might lock the doors.
Teacher Terry
6-1-18, 3:12pm
I saw on social media that many Australians can't fathom why we would let our kids get slaughtered while we hold onto a 240 yo law. They also mentioned that our founding fathers never could have imagined the type of weapons we have now. My only response is no clue.
I saw on social media that many Australians can't fathom why we would let our kids get slaughtered while we hold onto a 240 yo law. It's not a law, it's a natural right. The danger in criminalizing natural rights is, once you get a taste for it, where do you stop?
The only rights we have are those our society bestows upon us, IMO.
I could stretch it, and say we have a natural right to defend ourselves, but that doesn't extend to specifying weapons.
iris lilies
6-1-18, 3:44pm
It was privileged white men who wrote the Constitution, after all.
Those guys took some bullets, I think, to get this young country out of the hands of despot kings. Many of them suffered loss of life and limb, loss of family, loss of wealth.
You can call them “privileged” if you like, but I consider myself privileged to live in the country they built.
flowerseverywhere
6-1-18, 5:36pm
Yes, they were privileged enough to set the stage for the creation of the freest nation on earth, which influenced all other western societies for your eventual benefit. You gotta love em, dontcha?
Privilege? many were slaveowners. Imagine buying another human being and enslaving them. Not exactly the stage for freedom for all. Maybe that is a natural right we should bring back.
Actually, the US Constitution is responsible for gun policies in the US. "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Actually I think they wrote a bit more than that but I suppose the point of the rest of it doesn't matter to some people. Apparently the NRA thought the rest so inconvenient that they didn't even bother to put the other part up on the wall of their headquarters lobby.
Privilege? many were slaveowners. Imagine buying another human being and enslaving them. Not exactly the stage for freedom for all. Maybe that is a natural right we should bring back.
Actually I think they wrote a bit more than that but I suppose the point of the rest of it doesn't matter to some people. Apparently the NRA thought the rest so inconvenient that they didn't even bother to put the other part up on the wall of their headquarters lobby.
OK, I get that you guys just want to be argumentative, and that's all right. Flowers, you know that those natural rights enshrined in the constitution were the means for eliminating slavery, just as they're the first line of defense against everyone's favorite dystopian fears such as those illustrated in The Handmaid's Tale, Fahrenheit 451 or 1984. All those evil white males designed the very structure we all benefit from today. Maybe it took longer to realize some of those goals than we would like, but there's no doubt some of them would never have been realized in this country without their foresight.
jp1, if you want to change the topic to include every word in the Constitution, maybe another thread would be in order.
When you guys start plotting a return to an era when unalienable rights are fickle, are granted or taken away on a whim, think hard and long about what you're going to end up with.
Teacher Terry
6-1-18, 6:52pm
I think the founding fathers were amazing in many ways such as risking their own lives if the English had won the war. They would have been executed and perhaps their families also killed. They were also a product of their time. Some for slavery and some against it. I feel grateful to them in many ways. No they were not perfect as they were human. There also is no way that they could have foreseen the technology that would come many years later. Guns being a Natural right that is no longer relevant in our times. The NRA is powerful and makes people rich and feeds off of people’s fears. Yes if the country tried to kill its own citizens people would resist with or without guns but ultimately the results would most likely be the same.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.