14 students killed, 1 teacher dead in elementary school shooting

Yeah, but MAYBE it shouldn't.

 

The court decided it does, and then repeated that decision in Caetano.
Your disagreement doesn't matter.

 

I know full well that I cannot make an argument that will convince you, Pixie. So, I'll say only that the weapons that sane, law-abiding American citizens should expect to be able to 'bear' are the same ones used by those "criminals and crazies" I keep on talking about. I can assure you that if the Second Amendment were stripped out of our Constitution, those "criminals and crazies" would still be able to get their hands on latest-generation firearms through Black Markets and other outlets, 'foreign and domestic'. So you see (I hope), it's not a matter of ordinary citizens wanting to have "tanks", "bazookas", "nuclear weapons", and all these other preposterous, sarcastic suggestions. No. But when the "criminals and crazies" have a certain class of weaponry, then common, ordinary citizens should have the right to them, too.

In other words, when some madman is coming after you on the street with a semi-automatic rifle or a revolver, you don't want to be trying to stuff a ball, powder, and a wad into the barrel of your 18th-century musket....

. "I sure hope that powder's dry...."

 

LMAO!!! Dude, the Soviets murder over 50,000,000 people. They're the good guys??

 

The Taliban won the war -- decisively. We lost the war and $6.5T. We will not pay it all off until 2050.

TECHNOLOGY REVIEW, The Taliban, not the West, won Afghanistan’s technological war, The US-led coalition had more firepower, more equipment, and more money. But it was the Taliban that gained most from technological progress. by Christopher Ankersen & Mike Martin, 8/23/2021.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/08/23/1032459/afghanistan-taliban-war-technological-progress/

 

Because we have an illegal lobby, a trade association disguised as a non-profit promoting gun SAFETY which has captured and thoroughly corrupted the conservative branch of our duopolistic government. Under the NRA the entirety of the Republican Party has become an advertising and PR branch of the American small arms industry. Their entire function is to encourage, facilitate and possibly soon compel the purchase of firearms by the American public.

 

The fundamental problem with this is that you have, via 2A, become traumatised to the point of paranoïa and simply add to the problem.
You have not answered to the way other countries deal with this...an advanced, sophisticated, well trained and funded police force.
Then "well ordered "police can relieve you of the stress of policing yourself. It is never perfect but is an enormous saying of innocent lives.
It requires à complete change of attitude by both police and citizen and à lot of money to set it up. It requires special forces specifically traîner. It requires coordination across state l8nzs.
Most of all it requires will and determination.
But at least children can grow to adulthood.

 

You know this statement is false.

 

Indeed. And far too many either dont réalise it or dont care.
And it is a roadblock right in the middle of an honest democracy.

 

Look, when it comes to this issue you're an excellent counter puncher but I have never seen you offer any solutions to a national problem. I don't even know it you believe there IS a national problem. All I know is you're belief in "shall not be infringed" has the equivalent of coming from a burning bush so to say that my disagreement (which by the way I didn't do....I only proposed a "maybe") doesn't matter means nothing.

 

So tell me.
If "arms" have no limits, when is your country going to draw the line, as bad and good guys start using armed drones and minimissiles?
Is this what you chérish in your Constitution?
A country that ressembles à Quentin Tarrantino movie?
If you continue to justify your being part of the problem, you will always have a problem.
You have to SERIOUSLY WANT to solve it. Not make continual excuses for it.

 

Doubt either of those is the reason. That sounds like something someone that's ignorant of the issue would say.

It wasn't twisted this it's written in plain English.

 

I don't need to propose an alternate solution to point out the factual / logical errors in proposals offered by others.

There's no rational reason for anyone to allow unnecessary and ineffective restrictions -- infringements -- on the exercise of their rights.
Especially if that right "shall not be infringed".

 

I'm a little lost on what that has to do with kids learning for years how to safely operate a rifle.

 

You do know that your article doesn't prove your point. Here (to me is a key statement) :
" U.S. forces would focus on protecting the population from insurgents rather than simply trying to kill large numbers of militants. The strategy also involved trying to persuade enemy fighters to defect and ultimately encouraging reconciliation between the Karzai government and Taliban leaders."
The point being we never tried to take over the country.

 

How much shot can you cram into the barrel of a blunderbuss?



What is the maximum size of the bore of a blunderbuss?

"These big bore shoulder guns were popular for self-defense or as coach guns.
They were great as military guns used for boarding ships or for crowd control."

https://www.sittingfoxmuzzleloaders.com/k-4/

 

So you are content to sit back and critque other "soulutions" without bringing anything to the table. Let the carnage continue as long as your rights aren't infringed upon and you think that is somehow a winning strategy. The easiest thing to do in the world is to criticize others but to offer nothing in return is dishonest.

 

I'm missing your point.

 

I'm sorry you do not like the fact I am -more- than effective at demonstrating the factual / logical errors in proposals offered by others...
... but that's not going to change.
Rather than worry about -my- solutions, why don't -you- propose something not based on factual / logical errors?

 

Me too.
That is what happens when supporters of mutual killings desperately look for a diversion when they can't justify their argument.

 

The Inconvenient Truth: The Taliban won, the US and its allies lost.

NEWSWEEK , The Taliban Won Afghanistan's Civil War. But Will it Win the Peace? BY DANIEL R. DEPETRIS , FELLOW, DEFENSE PRIORITIES 9/3/21.
https://www.newsweek.com/taliban-won-afghanistans-civil-war-will-it-win-peace-opinion-1625589

There was nothing subtle about America's losses in Vietnam and Afghanistan.
The entire world watched.



Many similar videos are now censored on Youtube.

For instance:




It was that bad.

 

There will always be mass killing events and there isn't a damned thing you or anyone else can do to stop them. We can slow their entrance into buildings but you can't magically stop them. Churches, schools, markets and other places will have to worry about shooters and bombs and idiots driving into crowds of old women.

So taking things from legal Americans is the height of dishonesty and trickery.

 

Gun control laws are always irrational, and are usually based on Fake News and fudged data.

 

Support for gun control laws especially gun bans is support for mass killings.

 

Older weapons like the blunderbuss that was used to sweep the decks of warships by boarders are much deadlier than modern military rifles and submachine guns which are designed to wound -- and not to kill. They were effectively hand held mortars.