They have weird crap for breakfast, no thanks.


So you felt you had more of a need for a gun when you were a scrounging student? That seems very rational, but is it not the case that the gun culture is not actually about a need but a right? The constitution says they can have one and as if spoken down from the heavens they will fight for that right for it.

Like most issues in the US, it's complicated. I don't have any unique or insightful comments to share about the Bill of Rights, or about the the prevailing mentalities here.

It's not that I believe a personal firearm debate has no value (it surely does). I just feel that there is no easy answer, and there are so many serious (internal) problems the US needs to tackle with all its energy right now. I digress again.

The constitution doesn't say anything... It merely illustrates to the daft some things that are inherent to all people, and no matter what rules are enacted, they do not trump what is inherent to each individual by virtue of existence.

So when someone tries to trump these inherent rights of individuals, it is not surprising that it often results in unpleasant situations...

To compare one inherent right to another... "I have the right to breathe like I have the right to have this firearm on my hip.."


What would you do if they made it illegal to breathe?
What would you do if they were going to punish you because you were caught breathing?

Well said. I vote we let this thread die and move on to something else.

If that is how you feel I would suggest not starting them in the first place next time.

Your suggestion is noted but AFAIK I'm not bound to follow it in this section of the forum. I thought we had pretty well covered most viewpoints but if you have something pertinent to add please do so.

For myself I plan to finish watching coverage of dozens of immigrants place their hand's over their heart's, say the "Pledge of Allegiance", and finish the road to citizenship at Monticello. Have a good day.

I was watching VP Pence swear in some new citizens over the 4th and thought of this thread. Eight years after my original post I'm proud to say that the great State of Kentucky has joined 15 others in allowing it's citizens to fully exercise their 2nd Amendment right to Constitutional Carry!

The ability, nay, obligation to duel for honor and so forth, as well as every citizen armed is something I wish would come back to the world.
Sure, I'd be someone who'd get shot pretty much immediately, but I think the overall curative effects of that would be worth it.

We've still got a few years until the sun munches us up, there's no rush, so humanity wouldn't suffer too much from a slower spread, if it resulted in a (hopefully) better overall quality of genetic (and behavioral) stock.

We know the scientific method now, logic is inevitable as long as certain things are followed. So what if we get whatever quantum doohickey we might get a few hundred years sooner if there wasn't a sudden explosion of duels and honor killings (no, not like the middle east) left and right.
We'd get them eventually.

Live great, live well, not necessarily long.
Of course a single, or even multiple comments are not enough for me to stuff all the holes you might find in my wish, and there are many I can think of, myself, but I do think the overall effect would be a net positive, maybe not immediately, but ultimately.

Clown world can only be cured with sensiblity and sincerity. Gods, I miss sincerity. I'm so tired of irony, sardonicism, trancelike thinking were people can say the most cruel, heinous things as if they were common greetings. (No, much worse than my wish for 'deadly duels')
I'll gladly give my life for such a law. Cause, you know, it's gonna happen to whoever would suggest and fight for it. Immediately getting shot, cause it's "funny".
Time is melting my flesh off, someday my loin snausage will be ravaged by catheters and I will drool and bubble like an infant, but with less mental acuity, while I fill my depends with ghastly contents until I finally croak.
That's my future without my heroic death induced by ushering back in such a lifestyle.

Oh, sorry for this incredibly huge rant. I'm just a disgruntled pansy, thumb up me arse "it's illegal to make yourself unable to be shot by the government by employing Schutzwaffen" German who has about as much options for sovereignity, both for himself and his people (this includes you! American of Germanic stock. Faroese of Germanic stock. Dane of Germanic stock. Dutchman of Germanic stock. Brit of Germanic stock. Heck, even the French, but only for this) as a ...as a...thing with very little options.

And, no, get your mind out of the gutter. I ain't thinking in base evil rayciss populism or whatever pavlov might have told you to salivate up upon hearing "Germanic stock" (forgive me, this butthurt reply is my own pavlov talking).
I just don't like it that the bad guys have more options, is all.

Anyway, I'm glad that someone out there can conceal carry a gun with not much hassle. May it be used for justice, and not for any BS.

SCOTUS uses the 2nd and 14th Amendments to invalidate New York's "proper-cause" requirement in order to obtain a license to carry a firearm in public.

NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL. v. BRUEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW YORK STATE POLICE, ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
No. 20–843. Argued November 3, 2021—Decided June 23, 2022

"(c) The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for selfdefense is no different. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public. Pp. 62–63. 818 Fed. Appx. 99, reversed and remanded."
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...0-843_7j80.pdf

It is utterly common that some folks who don't live in The States don't examine either size and population density or how gun violence is categorized, and conclude that the US is an incredibly dangerous place to live. It's not. 65% of all gun related death in the US is due to suicide. Somewhere close to 20% is criminal dispute with criminals. Less than 10% is homicide on innocent victims. Many countries with extremely Draconian gun laws have far higher percentages per capita homicide on innocents than the US.

FWIW I abhor the somewhat recent increase in school shootings but I seriously doubt anything beyond more stringent application qualifications and checks could have much impact. The main root causes of school shootings are poverty, mental illness, and bullying which includes the ridiculous behaviour of teachers and school boards towards the victims of bullies while bullies are given a pass. Guns don't kill anybody or they wouldn't need triggers. Triggered people kill people and if they don't have guns they will nevertheless usually find a way.

It's worth noting that one of the most publicized and earlier school shootings was Columbine. Had that stupid LP bomb worked the death toll would have been VASTLY higher. Had it worked would we be arguing to outlaw LP? Enough knee jerk band aids. I vote we instead focus on root causes while recognizing that is a lot more difficult to accomplish, b ut at least that actually has a chance of some success.

If you look at the list of the highest developed countries on firearm homicides ranked per 100,000 population the US is at the top of the list. Pew Research lists murders versus suicides at about 50-50. Simple fact that places that have more and easier access to guns tend to have more gun deaths. The NRA's guns don't kill people argument is basically a fallacy. People with guns kill more people than do people without guns."

A potentially consequential issue would be if someone takes prohibiting guns on planes as unconstitutional to the Supreme court.

I disagree that mental illness is a predictor of violence although the Evlaude shooter carried around a bag of dead animals IMHO is definitely deranged.

As a side note the Texas GOP passed platform would allow anyone to purchase guns and carry them where ever and to completely repeal the 1965 voting rights act.

Yet we can't get rid of the violence on TV, movies or games. Just keep showing murder to children.

Well, instead of wasting time on "second amendment 'rights,'" I'd rather focus on the gun education that used to be(!) "normal and accepted."

Yes, I still remember when "marksmanship" was a very-prestigious high school varsity sport. "Any jock could be a jock," but not just anyone could win a place on that(!) team.

---

"Okay, goody for you, you just bought a firearm, and you had the legal right to do so." "What next?" Do you have the faintest idea how to use the thing that you just bought, and is it to the slightest degree appropriate to your personal use-case? (And, do you actually know what that "use case" is?) :eek:

Did anyone teach you how to clean it? How to store it? Even how to shoot it? Dear God ...

When I went to Boy Scout camp for the first time, my dad told me to return with two merit badges: "First Aid," and "Rifle and Shotgun." Little did I know then how I would discover the one-person, once-varsity, sport of "marksmanship." And, hold on to it ever since. A one-person game of pure skill. "It's just you. You, the weapon, the target, and the range." Wow. It's almost as good as programming. :)

---

But ... "where did the focus on gun safety go? There is something extremely wrong here! When did the NRA completely abandon its focus on "merit badges" and "high school varsity rifle squads," and become so utterly and completely (and pointlessly ...) "political?" A weapon knows absolutely nothing about politics. A weapon, by itself, will never save you from anything. It will certainly turn on its bearer and never know the difference. There must be more.

Yep.

https://comptroller.texas.gov/econom.../migration.php

Weird? Huh. I'm comfy cozy here.
All the Latinos down here own guns. Legal or not. Laws are interpreted loosely in a state as big as a country.

Everyone knows he murdered him. I have camped and partied at the La Kiva Club.

https://www.newswest9.com/article/ne...9-fb0e76fd87ca

The guns I used to teach my boys to hunt went with them after high school.
They have not killed anyone yet either.

Just FTR, michaelk, "gun homicide" statistics include criminal on criminal, and not too many people are very upset about that. I don't know about you but I'm only very concerned where innocents are involved. Those are as I said in the US around 20% not 50% and not markedly different from nations with strict gun restrictions. Another factor is that the US is a melting pot of a wide variety of cultures, race, religions, etc that for some are a source of conflict. There are still many nations in which there is a high percentage of homogeneity, somewhat less cause for conflict. I'm betting there are a lot of Ukranian families glad for gun owners these days. "It can't happen here" is a dangerous illusion.

I think jefro made a very valid point about "entertainment" as long term training. It strikes me as extremely odd how strictly controlled not only sex but even just affection is compared to violence of all kinds but gun violence is accompanied by loud, shocking audio punctuation, often made more visceral by things that are not really possible like cars exploding from gunshots, yet the real horror of damage to humans is basically erased and "cleaned up". It is often the seemingly only choice for any major conflict if we are to believe the entertainment industry. I don't know how it is elsewhere but it is ever-present in the US in most PG shows and can even creep into cartoons.