Mass Shootings

Walser · February 15

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

Insert it in my modem language translation and that has zero effect on the meaning. The controlling clause is the part where no law can be made. The preceding is simply a justification. It's the same as the below:

Reproduction of the species being necessary to the continuation of society, the right to have sex shall not be infringed.

That says no laws can be made infringing on our right to have sex. It does not say the sex has to be for the purpose of reproduction. The above amendment would also be a bad one needing to be repealed, by the way.

I am of the opinion that (as you pointed out) that our current interpretation of sentence structure may not be the same as in the past. I believe the first clause "A well-regulated militia" is a pre-condition for the rest of the amendment. But as worded it needs to be repealed/clarified.

Sorry if I am repeating what others have already said, but the insertion of the 2A into the Bill of Rights was to assuage the concern of many that a standing professional army could be a tyranny that a militia would be able to counter. The founders would be looking at our situation now and thinking "WTF is wrong with y'all?" We got a lot of damage to repair in a large part due to the NRA.

Eskimohorn · February 15

But it's not the right thing to do. The language of the 2nd Amendment in no way limits protected firearm use to militias. It basically says in modern message board English "Because access to firearms is required to organize a militia and being able to organize a militia is so fucking important, you can't make any laws limiting access to firearms."
Yes it's antiquated as hell and should be repealed, but that's what it says.

But the 2nd amendment doesnt say that, that wasn’t the original intent, and prior to 1990 and for 200 years thats not how courts interpreted it. We banned the shit out of guns, with broader authority given to States.

Congress can set the number of SCOTUS seats. Should democrats secure control over both bodies, they should ignore the gentlemen’s agreement and use their authority to set the number of seats. There is no unspoken rules about these things anymore. And it’s not even unethical. It’s authority they have.

But it’s largely academic, If we talking moving our country to being a functional democracy, there’s about a dozen major things that need to change.

Dahobbs · February 15

19 minutes ago, MirrOlure said:

Apparently, that would have been effective

Right, so just no black people in public spaces, right?

Fastbreak · February 15

Right, so just no black people in public spaces, right?

Especially after sundown

Huckleberry · February 15

9 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

But the 2nd amendment doesnt say that, that wasn’t the original intent, and prior to 1990 and for 200 years thats not how courts interpreted it. We banned the shit out of guns, with broader authority given to States.

Congress can set the number of SCOTUS seats. Should democrats secure control over both bodies, they should ignore the gentlemen’s agreement and use their authority to set the number of seats. There is no unspoken rules about these things anymore. And it’s not even unethical. It’s authority they have.

But it’s largely academic, If we talking moving our country to being a functional democracy, there’s about a dozen major things that need to change.

That actually is exactly what it says. A similarly tortured reading as your Second Amendment interpretation if applied to the First Amendment would mean that the right to peaceably assemble is only protected if the group is petitioning the government.

softlynow · February 15

Arguing the wording or phrasing is purposeless. In Heller, Scalia said, “[It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

The words in the USC mean what a majority of the nine say it means. They will torture the phrasing as they please and find persuasive whatever fact/anecdote/lie/gibberish gets them the result they like.

This bickering is pointless. Power is all that matters, and those with power think their hobby, manufacturers stock price and/or gun lobby campaign donations are more important than human lives, let alone predicate phrases or antiquated syntax.

Huckleberry · February 15

That logic means that it's pointless to discuss anything here. Which while quite possibly true may not be the marketing angle immamac is looking for.

softlynow · February 15

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

That logic means that it's pointless to discuss anything here. Which while quite possibly true may not be the marketing angle immamac is looking for.

Pointless discussion can be entertaining. This one would be unlikely to bring in unique views even with an MS Paint dick drawing showdown.

Eskimohorn · February 16

That actually is exactly what it says. A similarly tortured reading as your Second Amendment interpretation if applied to the First Amendment would mean that the right to peaceably assemble is only protected if the group is petitioning the government.

I dont see the connection. In context, militia is like 50% of the text. You have to revise its interpretation to make it relevant and do some mental gymnastics to apply it to more circumstances than having rights to carry for service in militias and being able to be trained and outfitted (well-regulated) without impediment by the government.

Phrases have meaning. i.e - I enjoyed your mom’s company…in bed. Remove “in bed”. That phrase drastically changes and limits what it means. The 2nd amendment has an “in bed” qualifier both literally and in framers intent.

I’m no lawdog, but I’m more inclined to side with 1800-1990 scotus over Rehnquist/Roberts courts on gun regulation (aside from the weird decisions that cropped up).

IMO, 2nd amendment was redefined at the close of the 20th century by rightwing activists. How is that even debateable?

MirrOlure · February 16

Right, so just no black people in public spaces, right?

Why did you bring “black people” into this discussion?

Biff Tannen · February 16

Literally no thread in DT about this. They used to at least give mass shootings lip service.

Dahobbs · February 16

9 minutes ago, MirrOlure said:

Why did you bring “black people” into this discussion?

Oh, I'm sorry, I should have said "gangster"

I'm curious, would the Vegas shooting have been prevented by not allowing "gangsters" to attend? What about the Walmart shooting in El Paso, could we have stopped that by simply stopping gangsters? Or the night club shootings in Florida, or all the school shootings. Really, how many of the mass shootings over the last 20 years do you think would have been stopped by preventing gangsters from coming out?

Pam Cummings · February 16

20 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Literally no thread in DT about this. They used to at least give mass shootings lip service.

Probably because any thread about this subject inevitably involves logical people saying "man, we should take measures to make sure this doesn't happen and that we can go to the grocery store, or a movie, or a championship parade, and not have to fear for my life or be prepared to have to kill another person at a moment's notice" and that's a political stance now and you're an absolute piece of shit for saying those words at all, let alone in a forum not marked "the cloak room".

Edited February 16 by Pam Cummings

MirrOlure · February 16

Oh, I'm sorry, I should have said "gangster"

I'm curious, would the Vegas shooting have been prevented by not allowing "gangsters" to attend? What about the Walmart shooting in El Paso, could we have stopped that by simply stopping gangsters? Or the night club shootings in Florida, or all the school shootings. Really, how many of the mass shootings over the last 20 years do you think would have been stopped by preventing gangsters from coming out?

This wasn’t a mass shooting by a lunatic. This was a shootout between two or more dipshits. Two totally different categories of problems.

4th&Five · February 16

Do the 9 kids that were shot know that? Because that’ll make them feel a lot better.

hookem2010 · February 16

With the same shitty result, due to gangsters, old white dudes, incels etc. getting all priapatic when they feel that sweet, sweet steel in the palm of their hand.

Dahobbs · February 16

39 minutes ago, MirrOlure said:

This wasn’t a mass shooting by a lunatic. This was a shootout between two or more dipshits. Two totally different categories of problems.

Weird. Guns seem to be a common factor in both of them. It is almost like if we made laws that prevented dipshits and lunatics alike from getting access to guns we could end up at a solution to both categories of problems.

Edited February 16 by Dahobbs

jimmyjazz · February 16

Late, and perhaps uninteresting, but regarding 2A: I am inclined to believe it is saying that SINCE we need a well-regulated militia, we cannot infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms. What it DOESN'T say is that the people have the right to keep and bear "any and all" arms, and indeed, we have restricted (and continue to restrict) the right to keep and bear certain types of arms over the years.

Glad I cleared that up.

Dahobbs · February 16

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

Late, and perhaps uninteresting, but regarding 2A: I am inclined to believe it is saying that SINCE we need a well-regulated militia, we cannot infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms. What it DOESN'T say is that the people have the right to keep and bear "any and all" arms, and indeed, we have restricted (and continue to restrict) the right to keep and bear certain types of arms over the years.

Glad I cleared that up.

Yes. That is correct and consistent with how other amendments have been interpreted. For instance, "Congress shall make no laws abridging the freedom of speech" has never meant that speech is completely immune from regulation.

Pam Cummings · February 16

1 hour ago, MirrOlure said:

This wasn’t a mass shooting by a lunatic. This was a shootout between two or more dipshits. Two totally different categories of problems.

Oh i see now. This shooting where kids got shot is different from the other shootings where kids got shot so i should feel better about it. Got it.

Edited February 16 by Pam Cummings

YGIFS · February 16

Well you gotta remember, it'd have to be your school to be considered a kid's shooting. But in this case, we're in Kansas City, so it's different. It wasn't their school. So it's not technically a child-slaughter because they got a half-day for the parade. So you gotta make my bunk.

Wait, what the fuck we talking about? Oh yeah, I sometimes forget bullets don't really give fuck one about location or target or days of the week...

C-Man · February 19

GOP Rep Tim Burchett running with this apparently:

https://www.threads.net/@ronaldfilipkowski/post/C3ffxpZOSbo/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

Smax · February 19

On 2/15/2024 at 4:07 PM, softlynow said:

Arguing the wording or phrasing is purposeless.

Sounds good as you just put 90% of lawyers out of business

Smax · February 19

On 2/15/2024 at 1:21 PM, Huckleberry said:

But it's not the right thing to do. The language of the 2nd Amendment in no way limits protected firearm use to militias. It basically says in modern message board English "Because access to firearms is required to organize a militia and being able to organize a militia is so fucking important, you can't make any laws limiting access to firearms."

Yes it's antiquated as hell and should be repealed, but that's what it says.

I mentioned this in one of the many other threads about this in the past and no one really responded ( maybe that means its dumb IDK) but what about limiting access to ammunition?

Ban it outright, yeah good luck, though I think a case could be made for home loaders

Limit amounts and keep track a database of some sort

Tax the shit out of it, like make the tax five times the cost of the ammo alone

landman · February 19

On 2/16/2024 at 9:59 AM, Dahobbs said:

Weird. Guns seem to be a common factor in both of them. It is almost like if we made laws that prevented dipshits and lunatics alike from getting access to guns we could end up at a solution to both categories of problems.

They are called criminals for a reason. The only way to stop shootings is to get rid of guns. Laws aren't going to stop them.

Dahobbs · February 19

10 minutes ago, landman said:

They are called criminals for a reason. The only way to stop shootings is to get rid of guns. Laws aren't going to stop them.

That is a stupid argument. But you know that.

Neonmoon · February 19

34 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

That is a stupid argument. But you know that.

Does he?

Pokoloco · February 19

On 2/16/2024 at 9:59 AM, Dahobbs said:

Weird. Guns seem to be a common factor in both of them. It is almost like if we made laws that prevented dipshits and lunatics alike from getting access to guns we could end up at a solution to both categories of problems.

"more gun laws" is equally as useless as "thoughts and prayers"

Dahobbs · February 19

17 minutes ago, Pokoloco said:

"more gun laws" is equally as useless as "thoughts and prayers"

More intentionally ineffective laws, yes. Well designed laws, no.

Brisketexan · February 19

23 minutes ago, Pokoloco said:

"more gun laws" is equally as useless as "thoughts and prayers"

Except for the real-world data point where tightened gun laws demonstrably reduced gun violence.

We don't have to guess. It has been actually tried, and has actually worked, in multiple western countries.

nbmishoid · February 19

But starting with the number of guns here, and considering today’s politics, facts cannot help define a policy that would get implemented and supported

Brisketexan · February 19

Just now, nbmishoid said:

But starting with the number of guns here, and considering today’s politics, facts cannot help define a policy that would get implemented and supported

Oh, we're too stupid to do anything about it. On that, we agree. The politics make it impossible. So, nothing will change. Lock thread, I guess. Except for the report of the next mass shooting. And the next, and the next, and the next.....

Eskimohorn · February 19

"more gun laws" is equally as useless as "thoughts and prayers"

In that “more gun laws” is only said and not signed into law, then I agree with you.

Biff Tannen · February 19

Oh good, let's have this discussion for the millionth time.

Longhorn_Fan68 · February 19

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Oh good, let's have this discussion for the millionth time.

I'm sorry, you're going to have to speak louder - the constant gunfire is drowning out the discussion. Did you say you're in concussion protocol?

Covri · February 19

Pokoloco · February 19

2 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

More intentionally ineffective laws, yes. Well designed laws, no.

Go on..

YGIFS · February 19

40 minutes ago, Covri said:

Only thing missing is gun 'experts' saying the type of assault weapon used doesn't matter because knives and cars also kill people. And then they discuss, at length, the caliber and ballistics of the attack.

Satchel · February 20

If we valued people more than guns, things would be different…like they are in other civilized countries.

Willfully Horn · February 20

Rs say, “enforce the existing laws.” Then they vote for dickless simps like Greg Abbott, who seeks to give clemency to a murderer.

https://www.kvue.com/article/news/local/pardon-murder-blm-protester-austin-texas/269-1846b545-aa84-4d0c-a637-a1690293ec8d

Of course, killing a BLM protestor aligns with their political worldview, so whatchagonnado?

Hard Times · February 22

I'm surprised an update to the mass shooting in KC hasn't been posted since 2 adults were arrested. Apparently one of them started the whole thing. They may be adults, but you have to have the mentality of a 5 yr old to start a shooting because someone starred at you. This is exactly why guns should should be illegal. A really good lady lost her life because these guns are not illegal.

Two charged with murder in Kansas City Super Bowl shooting | AP News

Longhorn_Fan68 · February 23

23 hours ago, Hard Times said:

I'm surprised an update to the mass shooting in KC hasn't been posted since 2 adults were arrested. Apparently one of them started the whole thing. They may be adults, but you have to have the mentality of a 5 yr old to start a shooting because someone starred at you. This is exactly why guns should should be illegal. A really good lady lost her life because these guns are not illegal.

Two charged with murder in Kansas City Super Bowl shooting | AP News

but you see, fuck the whole "well-regulated" part. *pew pew pew* yeeeeeehaWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rip76 · February 23

23 hours ago, Hard Times said:

I'm surprised an update to the mass shooting in KC hasn't been posted since 2 adults were arrested. Apparently one of them started the whole thing. They may be adults, but you have to have the mentality of a 5 yr old to start a shooting because someone starred at you. This is exactly why guns should should be illegal. A really good lady lost her life because these guns are not illegal.

Two charged with murder in Kansas City Super Bowl shooting | AP News

I’m surprised too.

Incredulity · February 23

On 2/19/2024 at 10:25 AM, Smax said:

Sounds good as you just put 90% of lawyers out of business

DDD Dad · February 23

40 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Whitewater Horn · February 23

On 2/19/2024 at 8:35 PM, Satchel said:

If we valued people more than guns, things would be different…like they are in other civilized countries.

Horn Under a Bad Sign · February 27

Homesickhorn · February 27

Not a csb, but kind of. The concrete company I work for got their start building septic tanks and burial vaults. I’m being groomed to take over as the production manager because the current one has basically said that he’s retiring in five years. My friend (CEO of the company) from high school (engineer from UT), started working with his father (owner of the company), about ten years ago. He’s since turned a regional company into a global one. I’ve been run through the ringer, working every different crew in order to learn, get my hands dirty (again), and hopefully earn enough cred to take over for my mentor (who is a badass) in four years.
All that aside, the hardest time I had, was building and pouring burial vaults. I was fine until they brought in a form that wasn’t familiar to me on morning. It was a child’s vault.
Last Friday, I helped one of our loaders load a dozen iron caskets on one of our 18 wheelers. This happens every day, but it was the first time I was tasked with helping due to the fact that we were a man short. The truck driver was cool, and helped more than he should’ve. He was from Uvalde. That’s when he informed me that our company built the vaults for every single child that was killed in the shooting. I didn’t know what to say. So after about a minute, I asked him what it was like to transport those child vaults to Uvalde from Kerrville. That’s when he told me that each and every parent ordered a full size vault and a full size casket for their child. He said they all agreed to do it as a “fuck you” to UPD. He said that they wanted them to see how grown their children could have been, had they just done something.
Needless to say, I shook his hand, signed the paperwork, and said goodbye. Then, I walked into the vault warehouse, and sobbed like a fucking idiot for about half an hour.

jimmyjazz · February 27

Damn.

Satchel · February 27

On 2/23/2024 at 11:53 AM, Whitewater Horn said:

Man, wouldn’t it different if those words had been applied to the whole pursue happiness thingy.

Sign In

Mass Shootings

Recommended Posts

Walser 1125

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

hornmpa96

Chuckie Finster

hayden_horn

Posted Images

Eskimohorn 5682

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dahobbs 18313

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Fastbreak 4045

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Huckleberry 34610

Link to comment

Share on other sites

softlynow 1894

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Huckleberry 34610

Link to comment

Share on other sites

softlynow 1894

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Eskimohorn 5682

Link to comment

Share on other sites

MirrOlure 15271

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Biff Tannen 46163

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dahobbs 18313

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pam Cummings 9868

Link to comment

Share on other sites

MirrOlure 15271

Link to comment

Share on other sites

4th&Five 41995

Link to comment

Share on other sites

hookem2010 2700

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dahobbs 18313

Link to comment

Share on other sites

jimmyjazz 47141

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dahobbs 18313

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pam Cummings 9868

Link to comment

Share on other sites

YGIFS 19458

Link to comment

Share on other sites

C-Man 27779

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Smax 3800

Link to comment