Parents of Michigan high school shooter Ethan Crumbley will go to trial, judges rule

He uses every opportunity to bump his own bullshit.

 

So a list of 16 proposals is not a "valid response" to a question about what proper gun control legislation.

Hilarious!

 

Another pro-gun poster who believes that declaring gun violence a "mental health issue" is, and I am quoting the poster: "crap".

 

Linking your own nonsense that has already been argued to deat is a valid response.

 

That’s because the second amendment doesn’t require a mental state to be viable for a citizen to use.

 

You asked, I responded. Obviously it's a valid response given that you can't rebut it. Not the topic of this thread, though.

 

True. All you need is a well-regulated militia. Though I doubt mental state would not be consideration in the "well-regulated" part.

 

There is a right to a well regulated militia, there is also the peoples right to keep and bear.

 

You are going to keep believing what you believe so it doesn't really matter what anyone else puts forward. Most gun violence has nothing to do with mental health. You seem to believe that if we could prevent all mass shootings then we wouldn't have any gun violence when it's really just a tear drop in the bucket. But, like I said, you are going to keep spewing the same tired crap.

 

It’s been rebutted by me and everyone else on this board.

 

The 20 times faster is comparing the 1780 Girardoni "assault rifle" vs a musket which Thomas Jefferson owned 2 of them. Its the age old argument that the founding fathers made the 2nd amendment based on muskets. Just pointing out that is not the case and also pointing out that the rate of fire back then in comparison to a musket was WAY more powerful and they still didnt put any restrictions on the 2A vs today having identical rate of fire with a semi auto hand gun vs an AR-15

 

Sorry but a semi auto hand gun does have an identical firing rate as an AR-15 so there is no "vs"

 

you are confused again Golem, the supreme Court did not legislate anything, they ruled the Laws that where legislated in Chicago where not constitutional. Thats how the system works..

Chicago could make a law that its illegal for people to peaceably assemble stating that only government employees can peaceably assemble and the supreme court would also rule that law was unconstitutional because of the 1st amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I understand when the Constitution is specific in giving the right to the PEOPLE you would rather that means the government like with the 2A "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."

The right of the people is clear as day here Golem not sure why you are having such trouble with this..

 

I tend to agree. I wouldn't say, as you do, that mental health has nothing to do, but the excessive and uncontrolled availability of guns has way more to do. But some of your colleagues seem to think that it is.

And that's what this thread is about.

You also don't think that training, background checks, confiscate guns when a judge adjudicates that somebody is a threat, or... any of that would ameliorate the problem. ALL of them, you consider "crap". But they are not the topic here.

 

I have said the same thing 2 times now, I'm not sure you are understanding my post

 

So instead of rebutting it, you demanded that the mods remove the link from this thread.

That says it all!

 

The link proves that they did. If you have anything to counter the arguments by Hisotrians and Linguists, THAT would be the place to do it. This thread is about two irresponsible parents whose irresponsible actions (or inactions) got four students killed.

 

musket to 1780 Girardoni fire rate: 1:20
Semi-Auto to AR-15 fire rate: 1:1

Is that what you are trying to say?

 

yep

 

The school did not send the kid home after the desk carving incident. Should the teacher and principal also be put on trial?

 

No idea! This thread is about the parents.

Makes no difference because you already made it clear that dealing with indications that a student is about to engage in a mass shooting is (and I quote you) "crap"

 

Well I didn't say that. Not even close. Quoting someone saying one word out of context isn't really a quote.
You think that the parents are negligent because they didn't think that looking at ammo was a big deal. They, and the school, had the same few hours to get the kid away from school after the carving incident and they both acted the same way. So, I'm not sure why you think that the parents need to go to jail but won't even discuss why the school should bear no responsibility.

 

Replies, by the rules, have to have a user comment. I’m tired of you using every opportunity to bump your own posts.

 

You are confused once again Golem. Legislating is the creating of Laws by the government, in this case the City of Chicago legislated that guns where banned.
McDonald vs Chicago is a lawsuit that was brought to the Supreme Court and they ruled that the legislation that the City of Chicago created was not constitutional.
Hope that cleared thing up for ya..

I have already countered all of your "historians and linguists" in this thread, so not point in going into your other thread, we dont need a historian or linguist to know what the founding fathers thought about people being armed. they said it themselves post 161 already let everyone know what they thought on the matter..

 

They never do.

I thought this was about people that were tingling related to the worst offender to me besides the person who actually did the shooting is the school because they didn't do anything to stop it.