Mass Killings at Virginia Walmart

Do you think it is better to dismiss efforts to prevent another Dunblane??
Maybe the US should also learn from its mistakes.

 

No they do not.

They restrict ownership because they're controlling the population and want them dependent on the gov.

 

Oh shut up. The subject was defending the orders of the elected President. I never mentioned the people.
Don't try that kind of swerve and diversion on me mate.

 

True you said in your name

Which is no where to be found in the oath
'
Dont say shut up when yoyur grasp of logic is laughable and you still proved your self wrong
you are way out of your league

No diversion or swerve

Your argukments are self defeating and illogical

 

What, no thanks from you to our Founding Fathers for the right to keep and bear arms. There are those who say that the NRA is a traitor to the Constitution because the NRA doesn't support possessing grenade launchers and fully automatic weapons.

 

No seriously mate.



One of the recent huge issues in the UK us the serious shortage of police officers..you know, those agents of the state?? I suggest you write about something you know about.

 

I cannot help it if you don't understand the concept of federalism and that our federal government is one of limited powers

 

Do you?
Based on that question, it appears that limited knowledg of the subject matter is being exhibited.
I would like to hear YOUR "understanding" of:
How the FBI "defines mass shootings"...

 

no we don't know what you claim would happen. what is worthless is criminalizing harmless activity and pretending that will stop those who already commit felony offenses

 

I am laughing at you claiming someone else has a limited knowledge of the subject matter being discussed here

 

You then said

" After all they have sworn to protect the country in your name "

They have not

Because elections are often viewed as a means to an end to then do away with elections.

 

That is like saying I should be allowed to own prohibited nuclear material because of my harmless studies. I mean what are the chances that I would weaponize it.

 

Yes they do take an oath. Good grief, your argument ignores reality. The poster gave you a link to it.

 

Not to protect the country in your name or our name or anyone's name

Which is the point

It is you ignoring reality and the link posted proves it

 

owning nuclear material has no valid purpose and is dangerous per se

weak, try again.

 

They don't protect the country against enemies foreign and domestic??


“I, ____________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;

Gosh . In English too.
So elections OFTEN produce governments which want to do away with elections.
In any system of counting how many US elections have OFTEN done this??

 

IN THE NAME OF YOUR ELECTED GOVERNMENT!!

Who else are they supposed to protect??

 

Totally unattached to the point I made.

 

Are you adding the need for valid purpose to my rights to own something? Was this in the constitution somewhere? Why should someone be allowed to judge my purpose as being valid. Maybe I get value as a collector of rare materials? Maybe I want to do personal research? The bottom line is it is against your very argument of a lawful citizen owning something when laws are in place to stop me from using it illegally already. We have murder laws, we have property destruction laws already in place. Why not rely on those?

 

you didn't make a point and you clearly don't understand that our federal government is limited in what it can do. BTW why do so many foreigners complain about our gun rights? I see the specter of Aesop's fox at work here

 

just stop the BS. when the federal government issues millions of civilians such stuff maybe you will have a valid argument.

 

I compared the comment about making laws don't stop people doing what they want to making laws about abortion.
Geesh.
Why all this stuff about federalism??

 

“Progressives” think that disarming honest people will fix gun violence, and that enacting cashless bail laws for those who pull the trigger will also curb crime. All cashless bail does is enable and encourage criminals. Gun control laws make honest people more vulnerable. Criminals will get guns no matter what the law is.

 

BS??? I am simply running with your argument of "malum per se offenses with malum prohibitum". Is there something evil about nuclear or radioactive material by nature? Now you have abandoned the principle or at minimum prefaced it with a quantity figure. "One or a few in itself can be viewed as evil but where there are millions they are not". What is the Latin phrase for that?

 

Re:

Being able to get a gun or not being able to get a gun makes no difference to a determined killer.

An example I frequently cite shows that even more people die when a determined killer can't get a gun and resorts to using crude but frequently deadlier WMDs.

The determined killer in this example only wanted to kill one person; an ex-girlfriend but because he couldn't get a gun, 86 additional people died plus his intended victim.

All that was needed to kill these 87 people was one dollar's worth of gasoline.(1) I believe that it is noteworthy that this individual killed more people with one dollar's worth of gasoline than anyone has killed with any "assault rifle" or other type of firearm.

The same is the case with much discussed school mass killings.

The deadliest school mass killing, too, was not done with any sort of firearm but with a simple home made bomb(2) that killed 44 people

My concern is that if and / or when guns become more difficult to acquire, determined mass killers will resort to using any number of crude but deadly WMDs such as Anthrax, similar toxic Bio - Chem weapons, home made bombs, Molotov Cocktails and the list goes on.

In addition to Russia, Greenland, and Argentina, there are over 60 countries that have nothing like our 2nd Amendment but still have higher homicide rates than the US.

What more proof is needed that attempting to manipulate inanimate objects does nothing to control human behavior.

The only effective solution exists in identifying and treating the killers with a more accessible, comprehensive and affordable mental health system.

Thanks,



(1) "Happy Land fire"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire

EXCERPT "González went to an Amoco gas station, then returned to the establishment with a plastic container with $1 worth of gasoline.[2][4] He spread the fuel at the base of a staircase, the only access into the club, and then ignited the gasoline.[5]

Eighty-seven people died in the resulting fire."CONTINUED


(2) "The 1927 Bombing That Remains America’s Deadliest School Massacre"

"Ninety years ago, a school in Bath, Michigan was rigged with explosives in a brutal act that stunned the town"

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/hist...chool-massacre-180963355/#KSipwm4IUrIbB9uc.99

EXCERPTS "In the end 44 people died, 38 of them students. It wasn’t the first bombing in the country’s history—at least eight were killed during the Haymarket Square rally in Chicago in 1886, and 30 when a bomb exploded in Manhattan in 1920. But none had been so deadly as this, or affected so many children."CONTINUED