Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Mr. Perfect »

No on almost all counts.

-Yes, the Founders explicitly stated the 2nd amendment was to protect yourself from the government. It's not my idea. However that is not the only moral reason to own a gun. You should be able to own any firearm to protect yourself from any threat to your person, as the government cannot guarantee your safety. The moronic statements from the left are dangerous to mankind. They seem to think that if you are being attacked, you can call the police and the police will save you. No offense to the police, but response times even in cities can be several minutes. All they will do is show up to clean up your carcass or get you in touch with a rape counselor. It's not physically possible for the police to protect you from crime, therefore you are your the only line of defense and have a moral right to have a firearm.

-Maybe the biggest false conception in this debate is that the US has no gun control, while say Europe has very well thought out restrictions. This is completely false. We already have European gun control in dozens and cities and states and it already doesn't work. We have registrations, background checks, magazine restrictions, assault weapons bans, ammunition restrictions and they already don't work. In fact, the highest murder rates we have in America are in places where gun control is the strictest, like Washington DC. Conversely in the states with no gun control we have European level murder rates.

-None of the proposed restrictions make any sense because guns are already illegally obtained in about 75% of the case, normally through straw purchase, and about 25% of the rest no restriction would prevent because they are fist time criminals with no record.

-AR15s are used in about 1-3% of murders. School shootings comprise less than 1% of murder. 99%+ murders receive no media attention. The current gun debate is completely divorced from reality.

-As for school shootings or mass shootings, these are obviously copycat crimes. As such, the best thing to do is a media moratorium on any coverage. However this is not possible in any way, so the only real solution is to end the gun free zone and let teachers be armed like they are in Israel. and have a couple of patrolmen stationed at every school. I'm not sure fencing is really needed.

-There is an underlying assumption from the left that restricting guns lowers crimes This is a completely false assumption. In the US gun rights have been increasing for 30 years and crime has been falling, regardless of Democrats or Republicans being in office. Conversely, from what I've studied from other countries I cant find an example of gun control lowering a murder rate. Eg, in Australia there was a pretty severe ban passed and it had no impact on the murder rate whatsoever. In the US we had an AR15 ban for a decade and it had no impact on the murder rate, at all.

So, no false solutions. The left isn't concerned with lowering the murder rate, they are responsible for high murder rates in the US, they are simply ideologically opposed to guns.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Here is the 2nd amendment, in totality.
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.
There is a disingenuous debate about what it means, to the point some liberals argue that it's incomprehensible. It's not. It clearly states that we have the right to join a militia and own guns.

Again, a very long and tedious debate on the language, but this slight modification ends the debate.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, AND the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This addition, which you might say is unfair, is actually correct when you debate the grammar. I'm not going to debate the grammar today due to the length of the debate, but this is the conclusion of the debate.

But here is a significant part of the text.

"SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".

This is why gun control of any sort is Unconstitutional and should be rejected outright. What the gun grabbers are saying is you can only own a gun UNLESS it is semi auto, has bump stock, magazine of a certain size, trigger guard, etc, all of these are INFRINGEMENTS, and I am protected from that under the Constitution.

Background checks are an INFRINGEMENT on my right to own a firearm. The state is telling me I can own a gun ONLY if I pass a background check. That is Unconstitutional. It is an infringement.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Mr. Perfect »

And as always, back to basics.

Image
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Mr. Perfect »

This hasn't changed either. We already have gun control in these areas and it already doesn't work.

x2vw2-DLhAo
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Zack Morris »

The Second Amendment is written with a clause that makes firearm ownership conditional on its association with a well-regulated militia. Studies have been conducted on how people interpret English sentences structured this way and it has been found that when the condition is false, the statement is held not to apply. The framers knew exactly what they were writing and why. And the courts have repeatedly found that the government does have broad authority to regulate who and what kind of weapons may be owned.

We haven't even begun to explore the fantastic regulation that can be enacted. The future holds all kinds of restrictions, from eligibility requirements, to muzzle velocity, to mandatory participation in a proper Federal electronic database. This is a generational thing. The tide is slowly turning toward tightening regulation. The current backlash and the revocation of NRA discounts by corporations is beautiful to behold. This is city folk vs. rural folk and city folk have the power of the purse here.
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Zack Morris »

Mr. Perfect wrote: This is why gun control of any sort is Unconstitutional and should be rejected outright. What the gun grabbers are saying is you can only own a gun UNLESS it is semi auto, has bump stock, magazine of a certain size, trigger guard, etc, all of these are INFRINGEMENTS, and I am protected from that under the Constitution.
In your dreams. You'll never have a legal right to own automatics (FFL exempted) and in the future, your gun "rights" are going to see a whole lot more "infringement".
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Zack Morris wrote:The Second Amendment is written with a clause that makes firearm ownership conditional on its association with a well-regulated militia.
Completely false. Every statement by the framers is that the right of an individual to own firearms is a natural right, with no conditions.

Zero statements from the framers say the right for an individual to bear arms is based on the need for a militia.

You will never find a single one.
Studies have been conducted on how people interpret English sentences structured this way and it has been found that when the condition is false, the statement is held not to apply.
The 2nd amendment wording does not show that the need for militias is anything but permanent. So you lose this way too.
The framers knew exactly what they were writing and why.
Yes they were. They all side completely with me and completely against you in their writings. You will not find a single framer that supports your point of view.
And the courts have repeatedly found that the government does have broad authority to regulate who and what kind of weapons may be owned.
No that is now true. Quite a few guns laws have been stricken down and with a 2 term Trump Presidency we should finally have enough judges to strike them all down.
We haven't even begun to explore the fantastic regulation that can be enacted. The future holds all kinds of restrictions, from eligibility requirements, to muzzle velocity, to mandatory participation in a proper Federal electronic database. This is a generational thing. The tide is slowly turning toward tightening regulation. The current backlash and the revocation of NRA discounts by corporations is beautiful to behold. This is city folk vs. rural folk and city folk have the power of the purse here.
This is completely wrong. The first gun regulations were doing prohibition due to gang activity, and then there was a long pause. The bulk of the guns laws we have were passed during the 70's, but after the Brady Bill in the 80's we had 30 years period of repeals. In the last 30 years we've seen a huge decrease in laws, a blossoming of concealed carry and a large increase in gun ownership, followed by a significant drop in murder.

So no, wrong again on every point and in every way.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Zack Morris wrote:
In your dreams. You'll never have a legal right to own automatics (FFL exempted) and in the future, your gun "rights" are going to see a whole lot more "infringement".
No. As I posted earlier, we've had 30 years of loosening of gun laws, followed by lower crime rates. Like in the past, there have been a handful of guns laws passed in a handful of states.

But once the teachers get armed and security improved in schools, which is coming, the school shooting issue will go away, and we will be back on track toward a true 2nd Amendment polity.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Here are the facts that destroy you Zack Morris. You are destroyed every time you open your mouth.

Image
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
kmich
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:46 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by kmich »

Image

Image
Simple Minded

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Simple Minded »

Parodite wrote:FWIW from the other side of the pond. Me thinks:

1. Raise age from 18 to 23 as the legal age to buy fire arms
2. Don't know what entails a permit now in the US, but as with a driving licence it would make sense make something similar a requirement for possessing and carrying fire arms.
3. Fence off the school area, with on entry gates two armed security guards with metal detectors. (similar to shopping malls in Israel)
4. Adapt the interior spaces with classrooms to easily and safely lock doors. Bulletproof walls, doors and windows. A system to lock corridors centrally via a control room to divide the building into separate secure zones.
5. One armed security guard (could be any employee with an appropriate license for that) per secure zone for quick enough response time.
6. Improve background checks for people buying a fire arm, as part of a fire arms licence exam.

If the above is implemented, it seems to me there is no need to arm teachers or dismantle the 2nd amendment disarming the entire US citizenry. The latter is not a good idea anyways and too many people want to keep their arms.
Any and all of the above idea will help. And as long as it is left up to individual schools/school boards, I say great. Let each school board address the problems within their own district as budget and public support allows. A rich school district that wants to implement all the expense security infrastructure can do so, and a poor school district that wants to allow their teachers and/or staff to carry concealed or openly can also do so.

No need at all for any state govt or the federal govt to get involved. Why? because it is not a state wide or nation wide problem.

No body forces banks, jewelry stores, shopping centers, malls, stadiums, etc. to hire armed security. None of jewelry stores or banks within 30 miles of where I live have even unarmed security guards.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Parodite »

Mr.P., by and large I think you are right. Would argue though that amendments can be, and were amended in the past. The constitution is not a Koran where the text should be considered the final and word by word recorded testimony of God awmighty and can only be understood in one definitive way. The good and revelation has always been a work in progress and operates IMOnonHO always everywhere in the here-now where the good, bad and ugly wrestle continuously.

If your position that background checks are unconstitutional is correct and to the letter of the law, it is time to amend the second amendement because the founding fathers probably did not have the fore sight to understand, evaluate all the realities on the ground that far in the future.

Aside constitution, it just is silly to not do background checks on gun ownership and apply proper licencing as it would be silly to not have licencing requirements for a plethora of other things that now exist in society.

To be fully consistent when abandoning background checks, why not abandon all limitations and let people just buy any arms of any sort? I mean, if you want to put up a real fight against a rogue US gvt army force you need a bit more than ar-15s. I'm converted to the idea of having fire arms to protect against thieves, rapists etc, but the extended argument that a US citizenry should be allowed and in no way impeded to arm itself against a rogue US gvt sounds a bit silly nowadays. I just like to hear how we, as national citizens, can defend ourselves against something like national police forces and armies that become tools of oligarchic criminal power players. When the deep state(s) has all that power. I'm open to suggestions.

Scott Adams has a suggestion though, maybe you have an opinion: he believes that a well armed citizenry with small fire arms will not tolerate such a police state. The weak spot of those politicians and military is that they have loved ones, children..that are vulnerable so that will keep them in check.

I'm skeptical though that this would be a good insurance against rogue deep states because they then will just do what all deranged dictators do: blow up your house with children in it. Or that of your innocent neighbors just to set an example. Initial random murder and terror is how they get and keep people in line. Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Putin... the list is endless. This is how 666 will reign supreme. No need to invite The Basterd with low hanging fruits.

SM: yes. Let it be done locally, freely, doing/not-doing things at their own cost, risk and benefit. The Ayn Rand principle? ;)
Deep down I'm very superficial
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Mr. Perfect »

kmich wrote:[imgs]
Lol poor effort bro. your side is asserting a link between guns, gun laws, gun availability and murder rate.

I am simply providing incontrovertible falsification data.

Your side is totally wrong.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Parodite wrote:Mr.P., by and large I think you are right. Would argue though that amendments can be, and were amended in the past.
Yes. If people want to change or get rid of the 2nd amendment they should go through that process.
The constitution is not a Koran where the text should be considered the final and word by word recorded testimony of God awmighty and can only be understood in one definitive way.
This is a dangerous thought. If laws don't mean what they say then we have no laws.
The good and revelation has always been a work in progress and operates IMOnonHO always everywhere in the here-now where the good, bad and ugly wrestle continuously.
Ermm in democracies the way we wrestle is through legislation, not some random arbitrary do overs. If you don't like a law change it.
If your position that background checks are unconstitutional is correct and to the letter of the law, it is time to amend the second amendement because the founding fathers probably did not have the fore sight to understand, evaluate all the realities on the ground that far in the future.
Not really. We already have unconstitutional background checks and they already don't work.
Aside constitution, it just is silly to not do background checks on gun ownership and apply proper licencing as it would be silly to not have licencing requirements for a plethora of other things that now exist in society.
Not really. We already have licensing and it already doesn't work.
To be fully consistent when abandoning background checks, why not abandon all limitations and let people just buy any arms of any sort?
AMEN BROTHER!!!!!!!
I mean, if you want to put up a real fight against a rogue US gvt army force you need a bit more than ar-15s. I'm converted to the idea of having fire arms to protect against thieves, rapists etc, but the extended argument that a US citizenry should be allowed and in no way impeded to arm itself against a rogue US gvt sounds a bit silly nowadays.
It's explicitly written into the Bill of Rights. In our 2 lives we will never accomplish anything as significant as the Bill of Rights. The bill of rights is the idea that set humanity free, wherever it is free.
I just like to hear how we, as national citizens, can defend ourselves against something like national police forces and armies that become tools of oligarchic criminal power players. When the deep state(s) has all that power. I'm open to suggestions.
An interesting argument I head some time ago was that the US government is so powerful that any insurrection would be literally impossible. Another person pointed out it took the US military 8 years to tame Iraq.

Let that sink in.
Scott Adams has a suggestion though, maybe you have an opinion: he believes that a well armed citizenry with small fire arms will not tolerate such a police state. The weak spot of those politicians and military is that they have loved ones, children..that are vulnerable so that will keep them in check.

I'm skeptical though that this would be a good insurance against rogue deep states because they then will just do what all deranged dictators do: blow up your house with children in it. Or that of your innocent neighbors just to set an example. Initial random murder and terror is how they get and keep people in line. Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Putin... the list is endless. This is how 666 will reign supreme. No need to invite The Basterd with low hanging fruits.

SM: yes. Let it be done locally, freely, doing/not-doing things at their own cost, risk and benefit. The Ayn Rand principle? ;)
Better safe than sorry. I'm keeping my guns.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Shooting the news

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Parodite wrote:Should dig it up, but the high number of shooting deaths in the US is particularly high because of the war on drugs and crime infested slums. If you deduct those from the total, there is not much of a difference with other countries with much stricter gun control like here in Europe where the war on drugs is way lower and without crime infested gang slums.

Conclusion: the problem is not gun control but the war on drugs and crime infested slums.

Manolo, you like Joe Biden? He is employed by the drug cartels in Mexico et-al. He doesn't want to legalize drugs. As such he is co-responsible for the enormous drug related crime and death rates in the USA.
Still true.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Keep in mind, death rate per cap in gun controlled Europe as a whole, 2.4 or so.

Murder rate in white America about 1.42, with full access to almost anything you can think of. White Americans live in places with mostly no gun laws.
Censorship isn't necessary
Simple Minded

Re: Gun control and school shootings

Post by Simple Minded »

Parodite wrote:
SM: yes. Let it be done locally, freely, doing/not-doing things at their own cost, risk and benefit. The Ayn Rand principle? ;)
The Reality Principle, The Self-Responsibility Principle, The Local Administration Principle, The I-Care-About-The-Eggs-In-My-Own Basket Principle..... so yes, I would also say The Ayn Rand Principle.

I still remember the interchange between a politician and a mother when the politician claimed that he cared about her children as much as she did. Her reply was "Really? What are their names?"

Call me naive, but me thinks you can administer your life better than I, and I can administer my life better than you, cause each of us have skin (personal investment) in our own game, but none in the others game, and if we mind our own business, we have real time information and instantaneous feedback.

Or to simplify, why do POTI, Senators, Politicians, the Rich, Celebrities etc either have armed security provided for them, or they often choose to buy their own. Either the same options are available for all, or it is an indicator of "some animals are more equal than other animals" thinking.

If local cops, veterans, parents, etc. want to carry guns in schools to protect he local children, no reason to involve anyone other than the local residents, the local carriers, and the local administrators in the decision process.

Voluntary local school security details would probably work as well as voluntary fire departments which work just fine in many areas of the US. Same principle as a Neighborhood Watch Group.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12562
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Post by Doc »

Image
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Here in the fact based world school shootings are at a low ebb.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... ings-says/
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Post by Mr. Perfect »

And it looks like armed schools are finally going to happen, praise the Lord. TV shootings will become a thing of the past and we can continue toward a legal machine gun future.

http://www.kentucky.com/news/state/arti ... 41909.html
This Kentucky school district just voted to let teachers carry concealed guns
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Post by Mr. Perfect »

More guns means more gun training, more gun training means more NRA members, more NRA members means more NRA voters. Truly America is becoming great again.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12562
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Post by Doc »

Breaking: Mass shooting in Kazzan Russia

https://www.rt.com/news/419970-kazan-sh ... operation/

Damn the NRA !!! :roll:
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Lol funny how narratives change. Liberals filter facts based on agenda. During a lull in mass shooting NYT accidentally stumbled on some facts I already knew about before they did.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sund ... -myth.html
In the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.

It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.

In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.

The continuing focus on assault weapons stems from the media’s obsessive focus on mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.

Annually, 5,000 to 6,000 black men are murdered with guns. Black men amount to only 6 percent of the population. Yet of the 30 Americans on average shot to death each day, half are black males.

It was much the same in the early 1990s when Democrats created and then banned a category of guns they called “assault weapons.” America was then suffering from a spike in gun crime and it seemed like a problem threatening everyone. Gun murders each year had been climbing: 11,000, then 13,000, then 17,000.

Democrats decided to push for a ban of what seemed like the most dangerous guns in America: assault weapons, which were presented by the media as the gun of choice for drug dealers and criminals, and which many in law enforcement wanted to get off the streets.

This politically defined category of guns — a selection of rifles, shotguns and handguns with “military-style” features — only figured in about 2 percent of gun crimes nationwide before the ban.
Even blind squirrels can find nuts. On occasion.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12562
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Post by Doc »

Image
Image
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Guns in the USA | Shooting the news

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Great post doc. I think the success of the armed teacher program will cement gun culture into the USA and will lead us on the road to legal automatic weapons.

I say this as tears roll down my face. This is a day I've dreamed of since I was a child. Every American should be proud to own the following. You should be able to walk into a gas station and walk out with one of these.

wWo-1-SBIM0
Last edited by Mr. Perfect on Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Censorship isn't necessary
Post Reply