They know why we vote for them and it's very frustrating for us. Why don't you move here and email them yourself and see where it gets you. Very good luck to you!! It's always easier to look at things from afar isn't it??
Elementary School Shooting in Uvalde Texas
- Thread starter JustBonee
- Start date
The gun buyback wouldn't buy one wheel from that one.
ElCastor
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern CA
I have read it. If the Second Amendment is not infringed by a ban on fully automatic rifles and hand guns, please explain why a ban on semi-automatic rifles and hand guns would be an infringement?
Shalimar
SF VIP
- Location
- Vancouver Island Canada
Imho, blaming the parents is premature. During my career, I have dealt with many violent offenders, often young, but never one who committed mass murder in a room of little children simply because they had been spoiled as children. Brats are not mass murderers. I would be amazed if this killer is not mentally ill. Substance abuse could be a factor also.
Last edited:
Some info: Fully automatic rifles & handguns are not "banned." They are regulated. Legal possession in many states requires special licensing, a more-detailed background check & an expensive tax stamp:
This (regular) citizen & his family own many full-auto firearms:
Warrigal
SF VIP
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
I now know the immensity of the problem US has when it comes to doing anything about gun violence.
I'm not suggesting that any of the people depicted in these photographs are actually dangerous but this is just surreal, and very disturbing.
(9) Joey R Johnson
on Twitter: "Former US army soldier Eric, 30, and his partner, Morgan, 22, in Lake Forest, California. https://t.co/QzctSfYhYL" / Twitter
I'm not suggesting that any of the people depicted in these photographs are actually dangerous but this is just surreal, and very disturbing.
(9) Joey R Johnson
on Twitter: "Former US army soldier Eric, 30, and his partner, Morgan, 22, in Lake Forest, California. https://t.co/QzctSfYhYL" / Twitterrgp
Well-known Member
- Location
- Milford,OH
I now know the immensity of the problem US has when it comes to doing anything about gun violence.
I'm not suggesting that any of the people depicted in these photographs are actually dangerous but this is just surreal, and very disturbing.
(9) Joey R Johnson
I am pro second amendment, but I am not a gun guy. [One pistol] for self protection should I need it ..... simply because in the case of a home invasion ...... @ 73, with pretty severe arthritis, neuropathy , etc ...... I can't defend myself like I once could.
But the folks in those photos are way over the top in gun ownership. However, they likely will never use even one in a violent manner [hope,hope] !!
So if that is where they choose to spend their money ? I have no right to stop them .
Only good thing ....... they cannot shoot all of them at the same time.
Alright Win, give it a rest, I should have used some other example, but I don't know the price of drugs any better than the cost of cars.The gun buyback wouldn't buy one wheel from that one.
I do think that if we ban guns except for people who really need them, you should be allowed to have one, because you never know when those raccoons of yours might decide to revolt.
Timewise 60+
Senior Member
Della...I guess you did not know this was a 'Gun Free Zone'! Which limits the 'rights' outlined in our Constitution! If I were a teacher I would 'carry' a concealed weapon. Most all schools have former military people that are teaching, all are properly trained on the proper and safe use of firearms. And why was there not an armed guard at this school? Bet it was tied to 'anti-gun' attitudes with some adults involved in school policy. When will we ever learn...?
Timewise 60+
Senior Member
First, hand guns are NOT banned in the USA!
You assume too much, I am not a 'died in the wool' gun activist. I think purchasing guns before you are 21 should be the law of the land. I also think all imitation military weapons (e.g. AR15, etc.) should be banned, as they serve no purpose.
As you already implied the founding fathers had no concept of what future weapons would be, so the term 'infringe' is difficult to apply to specific type of weapons. Congress has to apply some good sense here. That being said semi-automatic weapons, handguns, and all forms of rifles used for hunting, must be left alone! These are for personal defense...and sport & hunting.
Hope you didn't put too much money on your bet. There should have been an armed guard but the armed guard was not present. I think the guard's duties were split with other schools or he was out buying donuts but he was not there at the time.
This is Texas. Anti gun attitudes don't apply, so please don't look for any 'woke' complainers. There were none.
Timewise 60+
Senior Member
Regardless, the guard was not at the school! I win that bet!Hope you didn't put too much money on your bet. There should have been an armed guard but the armed guard was not present. I think the guard's duties were split with other schools or he was out buying donuts but he was not there at the time.
This is Texas. Anti gun attitudes don't apply, so please don't look for any 'woke' complainers. There were none.
Worse than that, what kind of 'attitudes' did those who hired or managed this guard that allowed him/her to go for donuts or go to cover different schools, or whatever? If I were a parent, I would be hunting that guard and who allowed him freedom to wonder! Maybe he was just incompetent, but then whomever hired the guard owns this failure to protect the kids...
A guard that does not guard when kids are in school, is no guard!
Timewise, no civilized place would allow a teacher to carry a concealed weapon. A teacher is not a secret agent in a fantasy movie. If I had a child who had such a teacher, I would be leading a movement to have that teacher fired at once, and you can be sure that my precious child would not be in that class.
A specially trained armed guard is another story. Sadly, they may be needed in today's schools, provided they do their job and don't just stand around waiting for orders.
So, you are not a dead gun activist who met his demise while wrapped in a woolen garment?
I honestly don't understand what you mean. You think national law should require everyone in this country to purchase a gun before the age of 21? (Or did the little word "not" somehow get left out?)
Timewise,, maybe you should stop looking at your clock, and do some proof reading before clicking on the "post reply" button?
They're just entertaining people. They do have a lot of money. Reminded of Jerry Lewis. He had hundreds of guns.I now know the immensity of the problem US has when it comes to doing anything about gun violence.
I'm not suggesting that any of the people depicted in these photographs are actually dangerous but this is just surreal, and very disturbing.
(9) Joey R Johnson
SeniorBen
Senior Member
Here's a bit more about what the 2nd Amendment actually says:
The historical consensus is that, for most of American history, the amendment was understood to concern the use of guns in connection with militia service. The founding fathers were likely focused on keeping state militias from being disarmed, said Joseph Blocher, who specializes in the Second Amendment at Duke University’s law school.
“An individual’s right to use guns in self defense is not expressly written in the Constitution,” said Reva Siegel, a law professor at Yale who has written prominent law review articles on the subject.
The interpretation that the Second Amendment extends to individuals’ rights to own guns only became mainstream in 2008, when the Supreme Court ruled in a landmark gun case, District of Columbia vs. Heller, that Americans have a constitutional right to own guns in their homes, knocking down D.C.'s handgun ban.
“That was the first Supreme Court decision to strike down a gun-control law in constitutional history,” Siegel said — and at the time, the court’s reading in was considered broad even to a number of conservatives.
In the ruling, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the “militia” phrase was merely a “preface” rather than part of its integral meaning. With the exception of felons, some people deemed to have serious mental illness, “sensitive places” such as schools or courthouses, or “dangerous weapons,” the Second Amendment allows regular people to own firearms in their homes, he argued.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/31/second-amendment-individual-rights/
Sure, the Founding Fathers didn't really mean all that stuff about a militia. They were in a hurry to break for lunch, so they just threw it in there as a "preface."
The historical consensus is that, for most of American history, the amendment was understood to concern the use of guns in connection with militia service. The founding fathers were likely focused on keeping state militias from being disarmed, said Joseph Blocher, who specializes in the Second Amendment at Duke University’s law school.
“An individual’s right to use guns in self defense is not expressly written in the Constitution,” said Reva Siegel, a law professor at Yale who has written prominent law review articles on the subject.
The interpretation that the Second Amendment extends to individuals’ rights to own guns only became mainstream in 2008, when the Supreme Court ruled in a landmark gun case, District of Columbia vs. Heller, that Americans have a constitutional right to own guns in their homes, knocking down D.C.'s handgun ban.
“That was the first Supreme Court decision to strike down a gun-control law in constitutional history,” Siegel said — and at the time, the court’s reading in was considered broad even to a number of conservatives.
In the ruling, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the “militia” phrase was merely a “preface” rather than part of its integral meaning. With the exception of felons, some people deemed to have serious mental illness, “sensitive places” such as schools or courthouses, or “dangerous weapons,” the Second Amendment allows regular people to own firearms in their homes, he argued.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/31/second-amendment-individual-rights/
Sure, the Founding Fathers didn't really mean all that stuff about a militia. They were in a hurry to break for lunch, so they just threw it in there as a "preface."
Nosy Bee-54
Senior Member
From the link:
"The Des Moines Police Department stands behind its stance about the issue. Sgt. Paul Parizek says putting guns in teachers’ hands is a bad idea.
“It’s a skill set that diminishes. We practice all the time. It requires precision and the only way if you keep that is by training and maintain training,” he says.
Parizek points to district’s school resource officers as the ones whose first priority is protecting the school."
I agree with the DM Police Dept. Just think of a situation where a teacher accidentally leaves a gun on the desk top or in the desk drawer and a kid finds and uses it? Even cops with all their training still can't get the job done. The 19 so-called trained professionals in Stetsons had to brainstorm for almost an hour on how to takedown one 18 year old in Uvalde.
Nathan
SF VIP
- Location
- High Desert- Calif.
Well Congress has the power, but there's too many of the opposition party still in the Senate that will continue to stonewall any such legislation.
Nathan
SF VIP
- Location
- High Desert- Calif.
No difference, both driven by fanaticism.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
2 separate forms of use.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, that's one.
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." That's the second one.
The right of the people. it doesn't say the right of the militia, that was already stated as being necessary to the security of a free state.
2 separate forms of use.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, that's one.
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." That's the second one.
The right of the people. it doesn't say the right of the militia, that was already stated as being necessary to the security of a free state.
Sorry but there is no way I would move there, too dangerous with guns everywhere.
If they had any idea of the guns to come in the future they would never have written it that way! How about an amendment to the Constitution, banning all guns except the guns that were used in 1776.
ElCastor
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern CA
The purchase and sale of fully automatic weapons in the United States is severely restricted by law. Presumably this includes hand guns. A 9mm semi-automatic was used to kill several kids in at least one school shooting, and bump stocks which are used to make semi-automatic rifles fully automatic are currently legal thanks to a lawsuit by "gun activists".
"Boulder, Colorado: March 22, 2021: 10 dead
Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa bought a Ruger AR-556 pistol, a semi-automatic weapon with a capacity of up to 30 rounds, six days before the shooting at King Soopers grocery store, police said."
https://www.kcci.com/article/22-mass-shootings-374-dead-where-did-the-guns-come-from/40130537
And, a semiautomatic rifle was used in the Texas school shooting.
A six shooter worked for Wyatt Earp. It, and or my personal preference, a pump shotgun, should be sufficient for home defense, but less practical for mass murder.
Yes, Canada is crime free. Their Swat Team members are bored with nothing to do but eat doughnuts.
The Regina Police task force unit is described on its website as: ‘Trained in covert entries (into a building), dynamic entries, high-risk warrant service (drug-search warrant), hostage rescue and resolving barricaded-person situations.
Of course. There is no reason to arrest or prosecute any murderer who uses a gun. It's not the criminals' fault; it's the gun's fault.
Guns have the power to turn decent people into murderers.