Simply must have more guns

[Dawkinsrocks]

yet again we see all too graphically why Americana need more guns

Toddlers should go to school armed

Foetuses should be armed

Then they could shoot abortionists in the Act

More guns would ensure Americans continue to kill more Americans than every terrorist ever combined x 100

But at least they can sleep easy knowing their government can’t come after them

Every cloud

 

[Openmind]

yet again we see all too graphically why Americana need more guns

Toddlers should go to school armed

Foetuses should be armed

Then they could shoot abortionists in the Act

More guns would ensure Americans continue to kill more Americans than every terrorist ever combined x 100

But at least they can sleep easy knowing their government can’t come after them

Every cloud

Heavy sarcasm! If it wasn't so very sad, you might even get me to laugh with you!

This is so sick!

Every politicien who takes money from the NRA has blood on their hands. But further, EVERY American who refuses to consider banning semi-automatics weapons and limit the # of magazines for sale, every American who continues to vote for those taking money from the NRA ALSO have blood on their hands, and that blood can't be washed off!

 

[BigRob]

Every politicien who takes money from the NRA has blood on their hands. But further, EVERY American who refuses to consider banning semi-automatics weapons and limit the # of magazines for sale, every American who continues to vote for those taking money from the NRA ALSO have blood on their hands, and that blood can't be washed off!

What a load of unabashed bullshit. You think this statement is helpful? If you want to effectively guarantee people stop listening before you even make an argument you comment is a great lesson in how to accomplish that. You are going to sit there with a straight face and claim that a responsible gun owner a thousand miles from Florida has "blood on their hands" because they have the audacity to believe in the 2nd amendment? Pathetic.

There is nothing in the world, be it in a war zone or whatever, that will adequately prepare you to watch your friends be killed...in an IED attack, a war, or a school shooting. What happened in this school is tragic. Lives were lost and other lives are going to be forever altered.

It is only natural for people to offer their thoughts and prayers following an event like this. Everyone recognizes that this is horrible and for many people this is how they can show immediate support to the victims and their families. Liberals respond to these voices of support offering "thoughts and prayers" with a literal collective "fuck you", and then wonder why people have already checked out of the debate when anything meaningful might actually be proposed. Ironically, in my personal experience, the same people screaming "fuck you" are the ones who rush to change their profile picture to a French flag, or post some drawings in solidarity when something happens overseas. You want to have a serious discussion about public policy proposals? A good place to start is not by telling the people on the other side they "have blood on their hands" and not pretending they are stupid for trying to show solidarity.

And to the Republicans who are seemingly rushing to the narrative of challenging the number of actual school shootings this year....why? The 18 number that is being used is clearly wrong, but so what? Even if there was only one school shooting this year, that doesn't make this situation any better. Stop pretending that this is the issue and not the fact that there are 17 dead kids.

And liberals who make an argument (like above) about banning semi-automatic weapons (which is basically every gun except single shot and bolt action type guns), you need to recognize that constitutional rights are not considered forfeit because a lunatic does something like this. We don't expect to lose our 1st amendment rights is someone says something stupid...we don't expect to lose our 4th amendment rights if there is a crime spree...why should we forfeit 2nd amendment rights because of this? At the end of the day those rights trump the actions of this lunatic.

 

[The Scotsman]

And liberals who make an argument (like above) about banning semi-automatic weapons (which is basically every gun except single shot and bolt action type guns), you need to recognize that constitutional rights are not considered forfeit because a lunatic does something like this.

I think you mean lunatics (plural)....its happened before I think...a number of times?
Interesting....is the label "liberal" supposed to be a euphemism for something...somebody with an alternative on this 2nd amendment viewpoint perhaps....perhaps shrilling your "fuck you" is exactly what should be aimed at you? Perhaps the alternative viewpont is you can take your second amendment and shove it up your fucking ass.......what do you think?
Rights come with responsibilities.....interesting soundbite isn't it?

 

[BigRob]

I think you mean lunatics (plural)....its happened before I think...a number of times?

Yes - and your constitutionally protected rights are no more forfeit if it happens again too.

Interesting....is the label "liberal" supposed to be a euphemism for something...somebody with an alternative on this 2nd amendment viewpoint perhaps....

"Liberal" is used here to describe a typical reaction among self-identified Democrats that is everywhere in the news and social media at the moment.

perhaps shrilling your "fuck you" is exactly what should be aimed at you? Perhaps the alternative viewpont is you can take your second amendment and shove it up your fucking ass.......what do you think?

I think that is the argument already being made - and I think it is idiotic. My constitutionally protected rights are not forfeit because a lunatic went nuts with a gun. If you want to change the 2nd amendment there is a process spelled out to do just that. The simple fact is that the country doesn't want to do that...period.

Sitting there screeching "shove the 2nd amendment up your ass" might make you feel better - but short of just ensuring that the majority of the country ignores you I'm not sure what else you actually accomplish.

Rights come with responsibilities.....interesting soundbite isn't it?

They do - and this lunatic will hopefully be put to death. But none of that negates what the Constitution says. Do we expect to forfeit our 1st amendment rights because someone said something stupid? Do we throw away our 4th amendment rights if crime ticks up? No - the premise is absurd - just as the premise is absurd that a lunatic with a gun negates the 2nd amendment for millions of law abiding, responsible gun owners.

 

[Openmind]

What a load of unabashed bullshit. You think this statement is helpful? If you want to effectively guarantee people stop listening before you even make an argument you comment is a great lesson in how to accomplish that. You are going to sit there with a straight face and claim that a responsible gun owner a thousand miles from Florida has "blood on their hands" because they have the audacity to believe in the 2nd amendment? Pathetic.

There is nothing in the world, be it in a war zone or whatever, that will adequately prepare you to watch your friends be killed...in an IED attack, a war, or a school shooting. What happened in this school is tragic. Lives were lost and other lives are going to be forever altered.

It is only natural for people to offer their thoughts and prayers following an event like this. Everyone recognizes that this is horrible and for many people this is how they can show immediate support to the victims and their families. Liberals respond to these voices of support offering "thoughts and prayers" with a literal collective "fuck you", and then wonder why people have already checked out of the debate when anything meaningful might actually be proposed. Ironically, in my personal experience, the same people screaming "fuck you" are the ones who rush to change their profile picture to a French flag, or post some drawings in solidarity when something happens overseas. You want to have a serious discussion about public policy proposals? A good place to start is not by telling the people on the other side they "have blood on their hands" and not pretending they are stupid for trying to show solidarity.

And to the Republicans who are seemingly rushing to the narrative of challenging the number of actual school shootings this year....why? The 18 number that is being used is clearly wrong, but so what? Even if there was only one school shooting this year, that doesn't make this situation any better. Stop pretending that this is the issue and not the fact that there are 17 dead kids.

And liberals who make an argument (like above) about banning semi-automatic weapons (which is basically every gun except single shot and bolt action type guns), you need to recognize that constitutional rights are not considered forfeit because a lunatic does something like this. We don't expect to lose our 1st amendment rights is someone says something stupid...we don't expect to lose our 4th amendment rights if there is a crime spree...why should we forfeit 2nd amendment rights because of this? At the end of the day those rights trump the actions of this lunatic.

I believe in the second amendment. I do not believe the modern interpretation of the second amendment is correct. I do not believe that our forefather every met for today's firearms to be available to everyone, but especially NOT those who are so delusional and addicted to firearms that they believe the NEED one (or more) AR-15 or worse!

I believe that our forefathers never intended to make today's and TOMORROW's firearm technology available to every fool in the USA, that they did not intend that we would become 100 times more likely to experience mass shootings than any other civilised country.

Are you ready for the next generation of firearms? Are you ready for the personal drones carrying automatic weapons or. . .worse, miniaturised nuclear heads? Well. . .it is coming to your neighbourhood. . .and maybe to your children or grandchildren's schools!

And. . .I don't give a damn if you read or not my opinion. I am well aware that gun addicts will not want to experience dissonance by allowing the TRUTH to reach inside their delusional bubble!

Luckily, more and more people are beginning to understand what fools we have been to let ourselves be played by the NRA and by the politicians who pocket their blood money.

It is unconscionable that, in a country that is suppose to be civilised and wealthy, we consider ownership of killing machines to be a RIGHT, but healthcare to be a PRIVILEGE!

Shame on you!

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Yes - and your constitutionally protected rights are no more forfeit if it happens again too.


"Liberal" is used here to describe a typical reaction among self-identified Democrats that is everywhere in the news and social media at the moment.



I think that is the argument already being made - and I think it is idiotic. My constitutionally protected rights are not forfeit because a lunatic went nuts with a gun. If you want to change the 2nd amendment there is a process spelled out to do just that. The simple fact is that the country doesn't want to do that...period.

Sitting there screeching "shove the 2nd amendment up your ass" might make you feel better - but short of just ensuring that the majority of the country ignores you I'm not sure what else you actually accomplish.



They do - and this lunatic will hopefully be put to death. But none of that negates what the Constitution says. Do we expect to forfeit our 1st amendment rights because someone said something stupid? Do we throw away our 4th amendment rights if crime ticks up? No - the premise is absurd - just as the premise is absurd that a lunatic with a gun negates the 2nd amendment for millions of law abiding, responsible gun owners.

Well, now that you have spewed another of your irrational rants based on ignorance, why not try some common sense (and I know I am asking the impossible). Just as a point, the majority of the people support stricter gun control laws.

There are quotes by the Founders, and I believe Sam Adams was one, that the people should be armed just as the military is armed. This would prevent the military from being able to overcome the people with missiles, bazookas, etc. However, over time the government has banned such weapons from civilian ownership. Yet the foolish ones do not consider this an "infringement". Why? Public safety is the main reason.

Now we have yet another case where public safety is at risk. And we have one of two ways to go. Either ban the most dangerous of weapons, or arm more people. Common sense would tell the sane person that arming more people will only create a greater threat. However, common sense is not the rule of the land anymore. Only fear mongering, and lies. Maybe you should consider arming your children/grandchildren so they can "protect themselves" since you cannot do so 24/7. Maybe a small .25 semi auto for ther little ones, then graduate to a .380, then the 9mm.

The Constitution does not guarantee that you can own an AR, or any semi-automatic weapon. Under the convoluted ruling of Heller you are only guaranteed the right to own a weapon be it a single shot, a bolt action, or a pump, period. If that is not good enough then tough shit. YOU change the Constitution, or the rulings of SCOTUS.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ult-weapons-en-banc-4th-circuit-idUSKBN1612PU

"But that is not the big news from Judge King’s opinion, which was joined in full by nine of the 14 judges who heard the en banc appeal. The 4th Circuit held that Maryland’s ban on military-style assault rifles is constitutional regardless of the standard of scrutiny because the Second Amendment does not give civilians a right to own such weapons.

That’s right: According to the 4th Circuit, the military-style guns used in a disproportionate share of the mass killings in the U.S. are outside the aegis of the Second Amendment because they are most suited for military use.

Gun rights advocates are not going to like this decision at all, not least because it turns the words of their favorite U.S. Supreme Court ruling, 2008’s District of Columbia v. Heller, against them. In the Heller opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia struck down the District’s ban on handguns, holding that the Second Amendment gives citizens a right to own weapons “in common use at the time.” Justice Scalia said, however, that not every gun meets that definition. “The Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes,” he wrote in Heller. Specifically, the Heller opinion cited “the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons,’” such as “weapons that are most useful in military service—M–16 rifles and the like.”"

 

[The Scotsman]

Sitting there screeching "shove the 2nd amendment up your ass" might make you feel better

Personally?...No. I don't give a rats...don't get me wrong I'm not attacking the poster just the post.

and then wonder why people have already checked out of the debate when anything meaningful might actually be proposed.

Nothing meaningful was proposed or has ever been proposed?

you need to recognize that constitutional rights are not considered forfeit because a lunatic does something like this.

Why? Your "constitution" is a moveable feast based on the requirements of the moment...are you saying that following x number of amendements to it no further amendments are permitted? There are arguments that cars kill more than guns so why nor ban them equally people argued against alcohol and the effects it had which of course misses the point....or did it....wasn't there something about that in the past?

 

[The Scotsman]

Just as a point, the majority of the people support stricter gun control laws.

Are you in favour of the 14th March walkout...if it happens?

The Enough! event announcement makes clear that the protest is aimed at putting pressure on elected officials to institute new gun laws. "Congress must take meaningful action to keep us safe and pass federal gun reform legislation that address the public health crisis of gun violence," it reads. "We want Congress to pay attention and take note: many of us will vote this November and many others will join in 2020, and staff have the right to teach and learn in an environment free from the worry of being gunned down in their classrooms or on their way home from school."

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Are you in favour of the 14th March walkout...if it happens?

It will happen, and yes. Maybe the kids can get done what the "adults" will not do. They are the next generation of voters, and Florida is a red state that is going to turn blue.

Check this out, sand pay attention to the number of mentally ill that were allowed to get a gun:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/

 

[BigRob]

Well, now that you have spewed another of your irrational rants based on ignorance, why not try some common sense (and I know I am asking the impossible). Just as a point, the majority of the people support stricter gun control laws.

There are quotes by the Founders, and I believe Sam Adams was one, that the people should be armed just as the military is armed. This would prevent the military from being able to overcome the people with missiles, bazookas, etc. However, over time the government has banned such weapons from civilian ownership. Yet the foolish ones do not consider this an "infringement". Why? Public safety is the main reason.

Now we have yet another case where public safety is at risk. And we have one of two ways to go. Either ban the most dangerous of weapons, or arm more people. Common sense would tell the sane person that arming more people will only create a greater threat. However, common sense is not the rule of the land anymore. Only fear mongering, and lies. Maybe you should consider arming your children/grandchildren so they can "protect themselves" since you cannot do so 24/7. Maybe a small .25 semi auto for ther little ones, then graduate to a .380, then the 9mm.

The Constitution does not guarantee that you can own an AR, or any semi-automatic weapon. Under the convoluted ruling of Heller you are only guaranteed the right to own a weapon be it a single shot, a bolt action, or a pump, period. If that is not good enough then tough shit. YOU change the Constitution, or the rulings of SCOTUS.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ult-weapons-en-banc-4th-circuit-idUSKBN1612PU

"But that is not the big news from Judge King’s opinion, which was joined in full by nine of the 14 judges who heard the en banc appeal. The 4th Circuit held that Maryland’s ban on military-style assault rifles is constitutional regardless of the standard of scrutiny because the Second Amendment does not give civilians a right to own such weapons.

That’s right: According to the 4th Circuit, the military-style guns used in a disproportionate share of the mass killings in the U.S. are outside the aegis of the Second Amendment because they are most suited for military use.

Gun rights advocates are not going to like this decision at all, not least because it turns the words of their favorite U.S. Supreme Court ruling, 2008’s District of Columbia v. Heller, against them. In the Heller opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia struck down the District’s ban on handguns, holding that the Second Amendment gives citizens a right to own weapons “in common use at the time.” Justice Scalia said, however, that not every gun meets that definition. “The Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes,” he wrote in Heller. Specifically, the Heller opinion cited “the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons,’” such as “weapons that are most useful in military service—M–16 rifles and the like.”"

I'd expect a circuit split eventually on this matter - which is fine of course. Given the current make up of the Supreme Court if you want to effectively redo the Heller arguments I don't think you are going to get the outcome you want.

All that aside, the continued call to ban the AR-15 doesn't make sense. Statistically speaking they are simply not used that often in terms of overall deaths from guns. Making an emotional appeal and demanding it be turned into legislative action almost never has a good result.

Then we lurch into calls of better background checks - but then, as we saw in Texas, information that would have prevented the shooter from buying a weapon never gets reported.

If you want to put a stop to gun violence, the AR-15 should not be your focus.

 

[BigRob]

I believe in the second amendment. I do not believe the modern interpretation of the second amendment is correct. I do not believe that our forefather every met for today's firearms to be available to everyone, but especially NOT those who are so delusional and addicted to firearms that they believe the NEED one (or more) AR-15 or worse!

I believe that our forefathers never intended to make today's and TOMORROW's firearm technology available to every fool in the USA, that they did not intend that we would become 100 times more likely to experience mass shootings than any other civilised country.

Are you ready for the next generation of firearms? Are you ready for the personal drones carrying automatic weapons or. . .worse, miniaturised nuclear heads? Well. . .it is coming to your neighbourhood. . .and maybe to your children or grandchildren's schools!

Automatic weapons are already banned and extremely hard to obtain. The idea that I'm going to head down to Wal-Mart and take home my drone with a fully automatic gun attached is utter nonsense. Stop hyping up made up scenarios and examine the actual data...the data shows us that the AR-15 is simply not much of a cause of gun violence in the United States.

All of that said - I think your opinion is perfectly legitimate. There can certainly be a debate over what was intended etc...but the real solution to that is the amend the Constitution - not make appeals to emotion and demand rights be taken away.

And. . .I don't give a damn if you read or not my opinion. I am well aware that gun addicts will not want to experience dissonance by allowing the TRUTH to reach inside their delusional bubble!

The truth is that the lamentations and screaming at law abiding gun owners and saying they have "blood on their hands" for following the law is comical....and only marginalizes your own argument.

Luckily, more and more people are beginning to understand what fools we have been to let ourselves be played by the NRA and by the politicians who pocket their blood money.

Remember that time less than a decade ago that Democrats controlled the White House, the House, and the Senate (with 60 votes) and took all that action on gun control? I don't either.

It is unconscionable that, in a country that is suppose to be civilised and wealthy, we consider ownership of killing machines to be a RIGHT, but healthcare to be a PRIVILEGE!

THEN CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION. That is the whole point.

Shame on you!

No...shame on you for demanding that the actions of a lunatic negate the constitutionally protected rights of millions of law abiding people.

 

[BigRob]

Personally?...No. I don't give a rats...don't get me wrong I'm not attacking the poster just the post.

I don't mean "you" as in you personally - just speaking generally. Sorry if there was any implication otherwise.

Nothing meaningful was proposed or has ever been proposed?

Then how is this all the fault of Republicans? Less than 10 years ago Democrats controlled the White House, the House, and had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Why didn't they do anything?

Why? Your "constitution" is a moveable feast based on the requirements of the moment...are you saying that following x number of amendements to it no further amendments are permitted? There are arguments that cars kill more than guns so why nor ban them equally people argued against alcohol and the effects it had which of course misses the point....or did it....wasn't there something about that in the past?

There is a process to change the constitution - and that is perfectly acceptable. What is not acceptable is pretending in lieu of such change that the rights of millions of law abiding people are illegitimate due to an appeal to emotion. That is not how public policy should be made.

 

[Openmind]

Automatic weapons are already banned and extremely hard to obtain. The idea that I'm going to head down to Wal-Mart and take home my drone with a fully automatic gun attached is utter nonsense. Stop hyping up made up scenarios and examine the actual data...the data shows us that the AR-15 is simply not much of a cause of gun violence in the United States.

All of that said - I think your opinion is perfectly legitimate. There can certainly be a debate over what was intended etc...but the real solution to that is the amend the Constitution - not make appeals to emotion and demand rights be taken away.



The truth is that the lamentations and screaming at law abiding gun owners and saying they have "blood on their hands" for following the law is comical....and only marginalizes your own argument.



Remember that time less than a decade ago that Democrats controlled the White House, the House, and the Senate (with 60 votes) and took all that action on gun control? I don't either.



THEN CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION. That is the whole point.



No...shame on you for demanding that the actions of a lunatic negate the constitutionally protected rights of millions of law abiding people.

50 years ago, the idea that you could buy an AR-15 off a lemonade stand would also have been a crazy idea. Or that 17 kids could have been killed by an AR-15 in a few minutes.

You are myopic as usual, as you do not think of the future.

Changing the Constitution? SURE, let's do it! But with 48 Republican senators and 4 Democratic senators on the NRA payroll. . .for years. . . and the current president being funded by the NRA, how will that happen.

So, what the kids are doing today, is the only thing that gives me hope to correct the insanity of the gun culture in this crazy country! The kids will soon be able to vote, some already this year! They will not forget, and they will not let go.

This latest massacre is becoming the worse nightmare for Republicans, for the NRA. This latest massacre has CREATED a new generation of aware citizens, of activists.

By the way, this "fantasy" about democrats having "total control of the government" for 2 years under Obama is totally ridiculous.

Yes, Democrats did have "total control" of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE and they had 57 seats in the senate. But to pass any significant legislation, because of filibuster, it takes 60 votes in the senate. And the Republicans obviously blocked every attempts!

Hypocrisy is so engrained in you. . .you are a worthy Republican!

And what about the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT of the people to pursue LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS?

How can we pursue happiness, when our life, the life of our children, is threatened daily by the craziness of gun addicts?

SHAME!

 

[Old_Trapper70]

I'd expect a circuit split eventually on this matter - which is fine of course. Given the current make up of the Supreme Court if you want to effectively redo the Heller arguments I don't think you are going to get the outcome you want.

All that aside, the continued call to ban the AR-15 doesn't make sense. Statistically speaking they are simply not used that often in terms of overall deaths from guns. Making an emotional appeal and demanding it be turned into legislative action almost never has a good result.

Then we lurch into calls of better background checks - but then, as we saw in Texas, information that would have prevented the shooter from buying a weapon never gets reported.

If you want to put a stop to gun violence, the AR-15 should not be your focus.

If Obama had had his way then those mentally ill would have been reported, and the killer in Florida would not have gotten a gun. But the NRA, and its clown Trump, stopped that from coming to be. I should also point out that is the last 5 mass killings the premier weapon was the AR-15, and as assholes keep promoting its use, and creating ways of turning it into a "full auto" (bump stock) it will become even more of the gun or opportunity.

Of course, we can do what you, and the right wing, has preferred to do for the last 5+ years, and that is nothing. Just let the kids be killed.