14 students killed, 1 teacher dead in elementary school shooting

Enjoy living in your eco chamber than

 

Echo chamber...

 

I find it hilarious that you think the US would send tanks to 170 million American homes.

I'd rather be staring down the barrel of a tank than standing in a holding cell by a corrupt government. You see we learned a lesson about that kind of thing that still somehow mystifies you. What's chilling is that you people would take cars away from normal people because of the crimes of a drunken driver, it's childish were it not so sad.

 

You have no militia.
A militia is an auxiliary force raised from the population to supplément in an emergency.
Or is loosely akin to à national draft..
And what are you going to be but some lightweight distraction when the real armies meet?
I already said twice. To be remotely effective you need armed drones modern tanks, long range missiles, mines and an air force.
You wouldn't last five minutes.
You fantasists think you would make a différence? Armed population in Ukraine didn't.
The only people who would be interested in overturning the government would be ex présidents who dont live in reality or someone who could take over your military.
In neither case would you make a pimple's worth of différence.
Your comic book excuses for the deaths and injuries of hundreds of thousands of people a year are pathetic.
And what is worse, you don't care à jot for any of them.

 

You quoted the second half of the amendment when the first half is the important qualifier.
The condition which allows gun ownership depends on, is conditional on, the need for a well ordered militia.
The second half of that does not happen so the first part falls. The need is not there anymore. The militia is not necessary. So neither is your excuse to keep guns.
Good grief, it is simple enough English!


“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIADISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER, 2008


In its decision, authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court was careful to stress the limited nature of its ruling. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia noted: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever reason."
Heller Law Center.

Maybe YOU should read the ruling.

 

I didn't say the US would send tanks to 170 million homes.
It doesn't need to.
Have you not been watching évents in Ukraine?
Nor did I mention cars. Could you please stay on topic?
Tip. If you want to take part in military operations learn the différence between the imaginary and the real.

 

You complete misinterpret Justice Scalia. He’s talking about a ban on felon gun ownership or mental disability qualifications, or bans on firearms in specific places. He’s not talking about wide spread gun control that bans common use firearms for the ordinary citizens.

By definition present participles are not conditional statements. We know that because you can lift that out of the sentence and the sentence grammatically will still make sense. “The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed.” It’s a valid sentence. Their is no condition or dependence on the perfunctory clause to fulfill the requirements of the thrust of the amendment.

 

That is "BEAR ARMS" not bare arms.
And I am not going to get into grammar with you. The first half of the amendment is the conndition upon which the second half rests.
The participle can and is used as a qualifier.
As in "that being the case, you can go."

And finally I don't for one moment take your word for the decisions of SCOTUS over that of the ones who made it. It does not speak of the rights of the criminal or those with mental health issues. They are not mentioned.
He is talking about YOU.

 

You're French, non? Or am I just mistaking your constant use of a common punctuation that French uses and English does not? You're not free dear.

I remember the dead children, which is exactly why I refuse to be made helpless.
Those cops stood around with their dicks in their hands for and hour and 48 minutes. That's enough time to watch a feature length film rather than do their ****ing jobs.
You can't put genie back in the bottle so you're never getting rid of arms. Even if you could, there are still explosives and vehicles and cutting tools and blunt instruments. The physically weaker should not be at the mercy of the physically stronger. A firearm comes as close as current technology allows to equalizing the advantages and creating a level field where someone can defend themselves.
My wife and my mother cannot physically defeat even a weak man. They can sure as **** shoot one in the head though, I know as I've taught them to shoot.

 

Well she's probably descended from collaborators so...

 

Tell the class how many defensive gun uses occur per year

 

Clearly you do not since you were questioning who is classified as militia in the US under federal law.

 

If guns werent freely available, which is contrary to Scalia's statement anyway, those children would still be alive.
Arm and properly train your police like any orher civilised country.

 

Irrelevant.
Arm and train your police properly.

 

I copied the definition of à militia.
If you have something different then you have zéro excuse under 2A to have a gun.

 

Are you seriously still living in the first half of the 20th century??
Stll I guess it is an improvement on the 18th century...

 

And if Eve had not eaten of the fruit of the poisonous tree we'd all be living in the Garden and everything would be joyous and wonderful.
You can make a gun walking around a ****ing hardware store. They are stupidly simple machines. You cannot put genie back in the bottle.

Our police are far better armed than yours, and out arm some militaries. They have all the training in the world and in fact we tend to teach others. The fact remains that they have no legal duty to save you, and even a fast response time means they're going to be showing up long after the damage is done in all but the luckiest of cases.

We've given the definition of militia as it is found in our laws. Please provide a definition you think to hold superior force of law. Further: 2a rights are unconnected with militia service.

So that's a yes you are descended from collaborators then. You really gotta learn not to reveal personal information by protesting too much milady.

 

As an addendum, the takeover of your nation won't come through any use of the military.
It will come, as it did in Germany, stealthily through the ballot box.
Right now Trump cultists are rewriting rules about state administration of the voting process.
They are tightening controls on who can vote, counting votes behind closed doors and making à chosen group of officials the ones who decide on who goes to the Electoral College.
All this is being done behind the headlines about more self inflicted slaughter.
You will wake up one day to à carefully designed political takeover which will proceed to remove the rights of political opponents.
And yes, it has been done before. Not à shot was fired.
Now you may celebrate the results of the takeover. You may be complicit in gaining from it. You may think it is about time.
Be careful what you wish for. You will have lost your country and sacrificed your Constitution.

 

You dont make sense.
I told you what the definition of à militia is. Look it up.
Now YOU give me the definition as understood in 1787.
Well it seems your police are less than useless unless they are killing or hasselling innocent black people.
Best send them on refresher courses.
And you can stop the ad homs. They are totally non sequitur and really very silly.

 

He specifically mentions felons and mentally I’ll in that statement. It’s irrelevant because the Supreme Court is going invalidate whatever gun control is passed anyways. The Heller ruling specifically says common use firearms and you can’t get much common use in America than semi automatic rifles and pistols.

 

That’s where the evidence would point but it could be lack of knowledge/interest in history as well.

 

“If someone wanted to take you gun…” that’s a nod to confiscation. The US gov isn’t going to take the guns from the populace. You’re missed the point on purpose regarding the Ukraine, keeping weapons is the ONLY reason they’re still alive.
You don’t understand what a simile is. Taking guns from legal citizens to prevent crime is like take cars from sober people to prevent drunks from committing crimes. You don’t understand military or civilian operations as you’ve clearly done none of the above. We don’t take advice from subjects, only citizens.

 

Scalia's comment never mentions felons and the mentally ill as having rights or not.
The text restricts the rights for all EXCEPT IN THE PRESENCE OF FELONS OR THE MENTALLY ILL.
There is no assumption of unrestricted rights for all.
Scalia noted: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever reason."

First that knocks the Superman theory out of the ballpark.
Second it restricts the right to carry any weapon whatsoever.
Third it excluded the paranoid suspicion that someone is out to get you.
IOW you need à specific reason to own and carry one.
Isn't it odd what is so easily omitted and forgotten?

 

I certainly dont understand your desperate attempt to strangle the English language.
First by declaring all armed ukrainiens are still alive. Best check with your foreign office. I think you would be referred to mass graves and hears of yet unburied bodies.
Dont patronise me about similes. I taught high school for nearly 40 years.
Yours doesnt stand up to examination. Both sides gave to be CLOSELY representative in the same way. Guns and cars are not. Unless you use your gun to travel.

 

Maybe you might like to read Justice Scalia's historical comments then?