Today, Texas culture and politics writ large killed a large number of children in Uvalde Texas.
It is easier to get a gun than license to drive a car in Texas.
Want a gun? No license, test, or background test needed, thanks to a law just passed.
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
Wait for the pieces of human shit on the right to stop sending worthless “thoughts and prayers” and begin saying the answer is to arm teachers or have more officers in schools. The modern right isn’t only a threat to the country because of its love of fascism and racism, it’s a threat because of their love of money from the gun lobby.
I watched a brief clip this am where Ted Cruz tried that tired old mantra that it is not guns that kill people it is people that kill people.
On Cruz, I agree with Jimmy Kimmel
Jimmy Kimmel on Ted Cruz: ‘What a slug of a human being’
1) No background check in Texas – how is that possible? I thought the background check was Federal law.
2) Only six states require a gun safety course and Texas is not one of them. Doubtful such a requirement would have prevented yesterday’s tragedy.
3) I am sick and tired of both political spectrums on the issue of school rampage killings. Both offer plenty of completely useless emotional responses. From prayers and wishes on the right, to demands for unconstitutional gun control from the left.
Greg, you were guilty of just this thing yesterday on Twitter, demanding NOT common sense reform, but actually demanding “draconian” reform. Draconian reform is almost certainly unconstitutional. Such proposals are worse than useless; they will serve to help elect more Republicans.
Even more exasperating were folks from the left who haughtily disparaged statements from Republican politicians who were proposing that we take measures to harden our schools: limiting ingress/egress to one monitored entrance/exit. The same security strategy used in every Federal and Statehouse, every public venue in the country is dismissed off-hand by the left for what I can only assume is because the suggestion came from a Republican.
FFS can we overcome our visceral resentments and put our heads together to figure out a constitutional way to help prevent these school shootings?
Totally ignoring the fact that the second amendment is anachronistic never designed with powerful automatic weapons in mind. To persist with the fallacious argument that the Second Amendment gives every man jack the right to own a gun is disingenuous and lethal for most that do carry guns do not consist of a ‘well regulated militia’ Those who persist with this argument have blood on their hands.
Second Amendment
As for primary school teacher being expected to have a gun handy in class, and to be able to use it sensibly without causing collateral damage is arrant nonsense.
The only winners in this are the gun manufacturers and the political lobby they back with cash. All those republican senators and congressmen, as well as one or two democrats, Joe Manchin, are only in it for the money and power they get.
That this situation could eventually lead to a civil war is sure to be in the interest of one notable dictator who would like nothing more than to see the US implode. How is that in any reasonable person’s interest?
Harden our schools? Are you admitting that we are living in a war zone?
As to the 2nd amendment’s meaning, I see it differently.
The United States Constitution. The framers were literate men. I believe they were as precise as possible with their use of language.
2nd Amendment: “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.”
I have constantly heard from the NRA that this means that no restrictions whatever as it specifies that a “A well regulated Militia” is specified but not defined, and uses the term “People”.
The United States Constitution.
Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 1: “The Congress the Power to -”
Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 15: “To provide for organizing, arming, and or governing the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according the discipline prescribed by Congress”
When referring to individual rights the Constitution uses “person”, or “persons”. When referring to the public at large it uses “the people” as a collective. So, the second amendment refers to the public at large, as a collective, not individual. The Constitution sets a bare bones outline for the militia’s organization. Keeping for its self the organizing, arming and governing of such. The army is addressed as a separate entity elsewhere, so this description fits the national guard.
ROBERT B ESTRADA:
We are living in a war zone. Hundreds of people are shot each day in the USA.
Your analysis was argued to the Supreme Court and they decided the 2nd amendment was an individual right and rejected your analysis. In large part because the first 9 amendments in the bill or rights are all individual rights and the 10th was a state right.
“The right of the people” is used in the 1st amendment, the 2nd amendment, and the 4th amendment. No person was used in the 5th amendment. And just “the people” was used in the 9th and 10th.
So I think Heller was well decided and I disagree with your analysis. The 2nd amendment is a personal right – just like the 1st and 4th (for example).
It stems from the equally asinine “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun” line of crap. A shooter doesn’t care who he/she hits, someone defending with only enough training to know which end the bullet comes out of (which is basically more than states’ training provides) can’t be expected to control their own fear, or the fear of hitting students or other innocents. And, as we’ve seen, if the shooter has body armor, the guns teachers would have would be ineffective anyway.
Last week, a friend drove up from Virginia to get the Novavax shot at Ontario Public Health. He is immunocompromised, and if he gets Covid it will kill him. Note to readers: this was a one-off deal that I arranged through careful negotiations skirting the boundaries of truth, so don’t head for the border. Note to self: wtf this got to do with Uvalde?
I told him: once you cross the border, the only firearm you will see is if you search my downstairs closet. We sometimes get raccoons with distemper.
The US seems strangely unwilling to learn from other countries. Much of this is, I feel, from an inability to face their history. Much is made of the Second Amendment. Think about it: a new nation, dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal (yeah, I stole that), viewing itself as a shining city on a hill…does any rational person think that they would enshrine in their Constitution the right of an armed rabble to overthrow a democratically-elected government? No, they feared a slave revolt. Still do. Americans need to face this.
Over time, various interest groups have chipped away at the 2nd Amendment…Scalia’s decision in Chicago vs Heller being one of the most egregious in a sad list. He justified it on the basis of “originalism”, and I guide readers to the piece in The Economist where people who REALLY know the language eviscerated his position. Then millions of dollars invested by arms companies paid dividends.
You’re stuck now, and I don’t know how you will ever get out of this jam. Sure, people living in the country can use a firearm from time to time. One shot dispatches a raccoon with distemper (it’s 100% fatal), and one shot into the air scares away a bear. Single-shot firearms can therefore be the norm. Good luck getting there.
You have my sympathy, really. My American friends are just as distraught as I am.
(Do not worry. I am even harder on my own country, when necessary.)
“does any rational person think that they would enshrine in their Constitution the right of an armed rabble to overthrow a democratically-elected government?”
The Founders were rational people and if you read the backstory of the Bill of Rights they were, in fact, mightily concerned about tyranny having just fought a Revolutionary war. So, yes.
Mike
That would be of interest.
And even though we all thought we knew how batshit crazy the governor and his henchmen were in Texas, it turns out we didn’t have a clue.
https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/2021/08/30/407291/here-are-the-new-texas-gun-laws-going-into-effect-on-sept-1/?
Bill 2622 seems to me to be completely nuts and likely unconstitutional. Ignoring Federal law ? Crazy.
I live in Vermont. We have had permit-less concealed carry forever. We also have one of the lowest gun crime rates. Then again, it ain’t Texas.
“Totally ignoring the fact that the second amendment is anachronistic never designed with powerful automatic weapons in mind.”
First of all, actual automatic weapons are not allowed to the general public except by very special permit. Virtually nobody has machine guns legally.
Secondly – the 2nd is not anachronistic because gun case law did not begin and end with the bill of rights. It, like all constitutional law, is consistently evolving. You may not like it, but Heller, etc is the law. Ignoring the law doesn’t help anyone fix problems.
“Heller is the law”…yes, so were Plessy and Dred Scott. You missed the point-Scalia’s reasoning was faulty, and shown to be so.
That is a disingenuous point given that a type of assault weapon has been used in numerous other multiple shootings.
Whatever, the illustration in this helpful article suggests that is not the case nationwide.
I wonder how many of those illegal bump stocks are still in circulation.
The number and sheer size of gun fairs as seen in videos is chilling. Are all those vendors sticking to the law of background checks and permits when selling firearms? I very much doubt it.
Gun ownership in the US threatens the stability of the country and the fear of civilian militia groups (ill regulated) loosing it if gun laws to the point of removal and destruction must be one of the factors preventing strong legislation. Other than the sheer amount of money involved in this tragic trade. Gun dealers earnings are blood soaked.
““Heller is the law”…yes, so were Plessy and Dred Scott. You missed the point-Scalia’s reasoning was faulty, and shown to be so.”
I have read synopses of all gun case law of the past 200 years. I am not a lawyer, but I do not see Heller as being poorly-reasoned or inconsistent with the case law – which has a fair amount of variation. And Heller does not stand alone by itself, there are two other recent SC cases upholding the individual’s right to gun ownership and use.
And it is not as if the individual’s right was ever once found to be un- or non- constitutional. As far as I could tell, it has never been adjudicated per se let alone even contemplated. To say that only a collective militia right is proper seems to me to be crackers.
In my experience, talking to Americans about guns is futile. You all made your minds up long ago., and the responses are rarely edifying. By saying “if you read the backstory” you are really saying, “I know way more about this than you do”, a questionable position indeed.
I have no doubt you do not see Heller as poorly-reasoned. That depresses me. Do you really feel a lawyer from New Jersey knows more about English originalism than the Editors at The Economist?
Do you have any useful suggestions? I have made one: single-shot weapons. Your turn.
I am a lawyer and you are right. Heller is good law. The right to keep is now well established. The right to bear is currently being more litigated. Cases have said you can bear in federal parks and in state parks and in public and so forth. Laws against bearing in private building or government buildings and schools and so forth will no doubt be upheld. But I see a country where any adult will be able to walk around carrying a firearm in public. That is what keep and bear means and is exactly what the founders had in mind.
So that is the reality in America. Lots of guns, being carried around by lots of people – in public. You will have to disarm to go into the grocery store or other private property or government buildings or schools.
Many guns carried legally and many guns carried illegally. Inner cities are already war zones with hundreds of shootings per day. Car jackings are on the rise and violent crime is on the rise.
If every vehicle driver were armed I bet car jackings would decline. If every car jacker were shot in the head that would have a deterrence effect and the number of car jackers would drop by one for every head shot. That is where we are headed. The better armed you are the better prepared you are for the next armed criminal or mass shooter. That is the world we live in.
Better get used to it and design policy that takes that into account.
If everybody were properly trained and armed I think criminal numbers would drop drastically – just from reactive fire. After 20 or 30 years we would live in a much safer country with a lot fewer criminals.
Just one person’s opinion.
Mike Risk:
My suggestions:
1. Armed guard at every school.
2. Armed teachers.
3. Controlled access with ability to lock classroom doors if someone with a gun breaks into school.
The armed responders take to long to get to the scene and the bad guy has to much time to shoot before he is killed. Only having someone armed before the bad guy gets to the scene has a chance to keep the body count down. So the solution needs to focus on killing the bad guy before he gets into the school or before he gets into a classroom.
Forget the fantasy of gun control. This kid bought his guns legally. He passed the Federal background check. He was not red flagged. Even if you passed universal background check – this kid would have passed (because he did). Also, we already have over 400 millions weapons in America – so we have to deal with the reality of everybody who wants a gun having access to a gun – and respond accordingly.
The more law abiding citizens carrying weapons, the better – more people to blow the bad guy away before he shoots a single kid.
That is the solution – in my opinion.
Your solution is no solution. The data are quite clear on this-more guns, more shootings. Forget this nonsense about the “good guy with a gun”-you get that from Westerns, not real-life.
The real solution is, do what Australia did. Remove the guns. Ahh, you say, but but but 2nd Amendment…look, if you people can’t amend the Constitution to deal with this ongoing slaughter, that’s on you. All the way.
And when the armed guard goes rogue – not so far fetched in these troubled times of rampant racism, religious zealotry, drug riddled, anti-vax, pro-life (that totally hypocritical position in the current context) anti anybody who is different fractured society.
That one has already been mentioned and fails the sensibility test at so many levels. You must be really dim to not get this by now.
Have you ever worked full time in an educational establishment? Of course not only one opining from a point of ignorance and lack of experience, not to mention a lack of analytical thought, that Peter Medawar syndrome, could write such breathtakingly ill thought out suggestions.
RickA: The more law abiding citizens carrying weapons, the better – more people to blow the bad guy away before he shoots a single kid.
That is the solution – in my opinion.
Well with 400 million guns in the U. S. now, shouldn’t we be seeing at least a few “good guys with a gun” showing up by now? I can’t remember reading about any. Maybe it’s because the people with the kinds of gear and homicidal tendencies that shoot up schools, churches, shopping malls, etc. ARE the owners of a lot of those 400 million guns.
Well – the border patrol guy had a gun and he killed the bad guy. What we need is more good guys with guns located on scene – not waiting to be called to the scene.
But go ahead and try to take away the 400 million existing guns. I don’t think that is going to end well. But you can amend the constitution and try to implement that policy if you want.
Mike, rickA is the resident asshole rightwinger and racist here. He’s had it explained that the “good guy with a gun” idea is pure bullshit and ignored it, just as he ignores science.
It’s not worth trying to respond to him since he’s not now, and never has been, interested in an honest discussion.
Pure bullshit?
There are over 100,000 documented incidences – a police report was made – of a good guy with a gun stopping a crime. There have been 19 separate surveys of mere brandishing of a gun or using a gun to stop a crime and the estimate is that this happens 0.1 to 2.5 million times a year in the US.
There are two sides to this story. But, yes, the data is not perfect. Thanks to Republicans and someone at the CDC who refuses to do his job.
Roger, there is no real agreement on that number although it probably isn’t off by an order of magnitude. The authors of the paper linked first (from 1997, mostly in discussion of the horrible work by Klerk and Gertz, see next) tosses out 85,000 as a reasonable number.
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6936&context=jclc
As to Klerk and Gertz — they asserted the number was between 2.2 and 2.5 million. Nobody takes their work seriously: for one thing, their estimate of the number of criminals shot by people defending themselves was more than 2.5 times the total number of gunshot wounds treated every year. For another, their data work was abysmal (see the above paper).
There is a classic study of the effectiveness of guns when crimes were committed (link later). The methods used were
The study also found that guns were used for self-defense in only 0.9% of all crimes.
Link to that paper:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0091743515001188
This whole “more guns means more safety” crap was really pushed by John Lott’s “work”, which was quickly shown to be bogus, if not outright falsified.
If the “good guy with a gun” idea is pure bullshit – why are law enforcement armed?
Why do you call the police for help if not to get a good guy with a gun to come and help you? Why is the military armed? Why is the national guard armed? All good people with a gun. Wouldn’t it have been good if the teacher in that classroom had been armed? At least that teacher would have had a chance to blow away the bad guy when they walked into their classroom! I read that that sports guy who was yelling to the sky for people to do something was instrumental in getting armed guards out of schools in Texas – how did that work out? It is better for an armed response to be seconds away than minutes away.
This is a people problem – not a gun problem. A gun is a tool and any tool can be used for evil. It is the person wielding the tool that we have to stop – not the tool they use to perform evil acts.
Sorry – that is just a fact.
We need to focus on the person and not on the tool.
What is making some people want to commit mass murder? That is where the focus should be. Whether they build a bomb, use a knife, use a gun or a vehicle – it is the person that should be the focus. We live in a world where people can 3D print a gun, build a gun from scratch in their basement, build a bomb at home and easily arm themselves in a million different ways. Sorry – that is just a fact. You can make knives illegal – you can make bombs illegal, you can even make guns illegal – it won’t make any difference. People are creative and crazy people are crazy smart. Focus on the motive, not on the means.
Just my opinion, of course.
You can try to pass more laws. But even if passed would they have been relevant for this shooting? Close the gun show loophole – not relevant here – this kid passed a federal background check. Extend the waiting period – not relevant here – no red flag law triggered here. What else? Gun registry – how would that help here? Pass a law against murder – oops already done. Pass a law against killing people at a school – oops already done. Pass a law against bringing a gun to a school – oops already done. Laws don’t really help once someone has decided to commit mass murder and go out in a blaze of “glory”.
Sorry – pass as many laws as you want – it won’t stop people from committing mass murder (once they decide they are going to do it). I would focus my efforts on stopping a person once they have decided to commit mass murder – using my suggestions from above. That is practical and may have an impact. More gun control laws won’t help (in my opinion).
Crazy is just a tough tough problem. If everybody were armed, the bad guy would be taken down before a large body count – that may be were we are headed – because I really don’t see any other solution but very quick reactive fire on scene.
I sometimes hang out on this blog, for interest and to increase my store of knowledge. I have seen the slagging you get from other posters, and occasionally thought: “Well, that’s a bit rough on old RickA.”
Not any more. Only a moronic psychopath (or a Republican) could have posted that. You erect preposterous strawmen, ignore the facts, and offer no solution.
I am just glad you live down there, not up here.
Mike:
I get it. Nobody wants practical solutions. They just want to wish a big wish for a better world and hope people will stop committing crimes.
I live in the real world. One were the words “men” and “women” have real meaning and have not been redefined out of existence.
I live in the world where hate speech is protected under the 1st amendment.
I live in a country where the right to keep and bear arms exists.
I live in a world where fossil fuels create 70% of the energy we need to survive.
It is a tough world – but better than the world you live in. You live in a world where people just wish things were different. Not very productive. Pass a law against mental illness – that should help! Or better yet just wish that mental illness would go away. Yeah – that’s the ticket.
I am also glad you don’t live where I live. We don’t need more people like you around here.
In the real world…lawyers have opinions, scientists have facts. By recent surveys:
-Canada is Best Country (the US doesn’t make the Top Ten).
-Canada is in the Top Five Most Free (US-ditto. Not in the top 10.)
-we are better educated, and more intelligent.
-although guns are a part of our lives here, our gun homicide rate is <1/5 yours.
-our Covid death rate is 1/10th yours.
-our health care is free for everyone, ranks about #7, costs one-half yours (ranked about #15).
Stay there.
If you had bothered to pay attention with a thinking head on you would have noticed my earlier:
“And when the armed guard goes rogue – not so far fetched in these troubled times of rampant racism, religious zealotry, drug riddled, anti-vax, pro-life (that totally hypocritical position in the current context) anti anybody who is different fractured society.”
What you are ignoring is that the constitution needs a radical overhaul WRT gun control so that fewer deranged or wronged people have access to guns.
Lionel:
No – I saw that. Sure you could radically overhaul the constitution. That is on the table. Go ahead.
All you have to do is pass the amendment modification through the house and senate, get the president to sign and get 3/5 of the states to ratify. Problem solved. Except for the 400 million existing guns and the ability of everybody to make new ones in their basement. Yeah – upon further reflection I think it would be better to assume changing the constitution won’t happen and even if it does it won’t solve the problem of crazy people having access to guns. They do and they will in the future. That is the real world. Sorry.
I am afraid changing the constitution is just wishful thinking. You can think that way if you want – but it doesn’t solve any problems on the ground.
Training and arming all teachers would have a much more practical impact on this problem. And we don’t have to change the constitution to do that. Even if just 50% of the teachers volunteered it would massively help the situation. Even 25% would help. Even 1 per school would help.
Mike:
Yes – Canada is pretty great (except for being part of the British Empire and having the Queen on your money).
Just make sure your bank account doesn’t get frozen based on your speech.
I will stay here in Minnesota – don’t worry about that.
There is nowhere I would rather live than the USA.
You really are as ignorant, and as biased, as other posters have claimed.
We are a constitutional monarchy. The Queen’s representative, the Governor-General, is our Head of State. This may partly explain why we don’t have violent insurrections.
You have been dipping your nose into the conspirasphere, I see. A group of uneducated anti-vaxxers calling themselves the Truckers Convoy occupied Ottawa and demanded the government resign. They had significant funding from American right-wingers. When their weapons were confiscated, some complained their Second Amendment rights were being violated (we have morons too).
This was all solved peacefully. Because of the external funding, about a dozen of them had their bank accounts frozen-for about a week.
This exchange is done. I agree with other posters-never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, and the pig loves it.
Rando citizens are not necessarily “good guys” and even the not “bad guys” running around with guns scare me.
ROBERT B ESTRADA:
Ok – I can see that. But if they were present at the school and shot a potential mass murderer – would you be glad they did?
My position is that the more people at the scene who are armed – the better chance of stopping a killer before they kill or before they kill 19 kids. Just trying to increase the probability the bad guy is stopped.
It is funny how most people are not scared by a cop with a gun – but they are with a law abiding citizen carrying a gun. They assume the cop is well trained and assume the law abiding citizen is crazy (I guess). But I would rather be scared all day long than have a killer have access to an entire classroom full of victims.
a) You never present practical solutions
b) Your second comment here is pure bullshit
dean:
It is not I who deny biology. It is those who pretend that people with wombs can be men and who pretend people with penises can be women who are denying biology.
If you don’t think allowing teachers who wish to, to be trained and armed is a practical solution – well you are entitled to your opinion. I think the first time a teacher shots and kills a potential mass murderer entering their classroom to kill – the country will hale them as a hero. You don’t really care about the children – you would rather see them get shot than go for the practical real world solution. Their blood is on your hands.
The shooter in texas got by the police because their service weapons couldn’t penetrate his body armor.
Shooters don’t care who they hit. Teachers with “training” (here’s the trigger, here’s where the bullet comes out, “training” dumbed down enough that even you could pass it) need to overcome shock of the attack and the fear of shooting their kids. I get that you can’t think, but JFC, are you always this stupid?
Yes, apparently you are always that stupid.
Always fun to engage with your dean. Your projection is so hilarious! You think men are women and women are men – and you think I am stupid. Ha Ha.
RickA
I guess in your world view men are men and women are women with no in-between.
It may come as a surprise to you to learn that there are those with female traits who inhabit a male body and vice versa. It happens with other species too. If you were a chiclid global warming could make you change sex, in fact it would.
Have a read of City of Djinns: A Year in Delhi for more enlightenment.
Lionel:
Well I am a mammal – and we cannot change biological sex (no matter the temperature).
Not with hormones, not with surgery and not with the power of our minds.
No matter how much they wish it, a male will not be able to get pregnant and give birth. No matter how much they wish it, a female will not be able to fertilize an egg with their own sperm (as they lack sperm production biology).
Those are the biological facts and wishing doesn’t change them. At least not at our current level of technology. Perhaps someday we will be able to change the dna of every cell in our body or implant and grow sex organs or move our brains into new bodies (creepy – not a fan if they ever develop this) – but not yet!
Sorry. Until then, nobody (human) can change their biological sex.
It’s always difficult to tell whether one of these statements from you is due to your ignorance about what was written, your ignorance about science, your lack of ability to read for understanding, or simply due to you being a scumbag.
It’s quite possible all of those things contribute.
You have proven that I know more about biology than you.
No, you’ve simply reinforced your lack of knowledge.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/
https://cadehildreth.com/gender-spectrum/
Since there are big words there, and you’re a libertarian, we know you aren’t capable of reading them. Perhaps someone will help you.
But mike risk is correct: you are too vile a person to deal with. Carry on in your racist and ignorant little world, where you and others like you pose a threat to women, minorities, decent people, and democracy as a whole. The only reason to pay attention to you is to monitor the threats you and your opinions pose to society.
You have proven your limits of understanding of biology. A male embryo developing between two female embryos will be exposed to elevated levels of female hormones and could thus develop gender dysphoria. Richard Dawkins and others have discussed this and similar in their literature.
But religion, as ever, tries to push against biology.
Revealing:
Texas lawmakers take home large portion of gun lobby dollars
and so Cruz walked away from awkward questions like the ‘slug of a human that he is’ (Jimmy Kimmel)
Ted Cruz angrily quits interview after being confronted about gun control
“Do you have any useful suggestions? I have made one: single-shot weapons. Your turn.”
I think we could do a lot more to harden our schools, which is obviously the most upsetting sort of gun violence. We could do a lot more to take guns away from known criminals, violent people, people with particular types of mental illness. We could reduce clip sizes, mandate safer storage conditions, eliminate ID check loopholes. We could start a real and robust gun violence data monitoring system. All of these things could help and all are likely constitutional.
We could legalize drugs, end gangs, improve our schools, and reduce suicide with universal coverage for mental health therapy.
Roger:
Great suggestions. I agree – those are constitutional. The only ID check loophole they will not be able to get rid of is a parent or grandparent loaning a gun to a child or grandchild. So if grandpa dies and the grandchild inherits a gun – they will not be able to make that go through an ID check (in my opinion). That is not an arms length transaction – like a true sale would be (which they could require an ID check for). But they could require an ID check for a gun show purchase – that would not violate the constitution (in my opinion).
I would also add – better reporting by social media platforms. The latest shooter posted pictures of his gun purchases (purchased legally at 18 and subject to a Federal background check). Now to me an 18 year old posting pictures of his weapons on social media is a red flag. Even an older person posting pictures of their weapons on social media seems weird to me – so social media platforms could refer those sorts of posts to law enforcement.
Anyway – good suggestions.
The Miller decision from 1939 also made it clear that “arms” means whatever arm is usually given to a foot soldier. Knives, swords, handguns and long guns from 1776 and handguns, long guns and shotguns in 1939. Automatic weapons would also fit the definition of an arm handed out to the average foot soldier. At issue in Miller was a sawed off shotgun (commonly used by criminals for easy concealment). The court said since sawed off shotguns were not handed out by the military – it was not an arm.
Google United States v. Miller :: 307 US 174 (1939) if you want to read the decision.
So the assault weapon distinction commonly argued doesn’t exist at law. If a soldier commonly carries it it is an arm under the 2nd amendment. So tanks and artillery – no. All types of guns – yes. Rocket launcher – probably not (they are not issued to every soldier).
The assault weapon ban was never challenged in court and if it were I suspect it would be struck down as violating the 2nd amendment. And if you were supposed to bring your weapon when called up by the militia (yes – you were – lots of state militia acts specify this) – wouldn’t you want a good military weapon to bring to the battle? Good for self-defense, hunting and war.
Oh, heaven forbid a violation of the 2nd amendment let us just accept that the terrible toll of children’s lives is worth avoiding that.
Guns are the Top Cause of Death for U.S. Children
What a topsy turvy world view you have RickA, that 2nd amendment. as it stands is past its sell by date.
Children at school should not be in a war zone.
As for arming guards – such worked well at Uvalde did they not. The spree shooter was wearing body protection, do you really expect a teacher to achieve a clean kill shot without collateral? You are insane.
The gun lobby should be declared a terrorist organisation and those who are paid off by the NRA etc should automatically be bared from governance.
RickA: “The better armed you are the better prepared you are for the next armed criminal or mass shooter. ”
If that kind of thing worked, then the towns in the old West would never have been forced to enact and enforce gun control laws. The would just have armed every man, woman, and child in town. Or, consider a war zone; plenty of well-trained, well-armed people there. Is that the kind of setting that you are envisioning as safe?
RickA: “If every vehicle driver were armed I bet car jackings would decline.”
Or carjackers would would soon learn to just creep up when you were not looking (eating a sandwich or looking at your phone) and shoot YOU in the head, then take your car.
RickA: “It is funny how most people are not scared by a cop with a gun . . .”
Many black people and other minorities are — and with reason.
Remember that when he talks about people he doesn’t include minorities or women — they don’t count in his worldview.
You only need to see how a white guy openly carrying a gun is seen as someone exercising rights, regardless of dress or apparent social status [as long as they don’t have tactical gear on, and even then…], but any person of color openly carrying is immediately seen as a threat to get both Tyvor’s point and rickA’s stupidity.
RickA
It will doubtless come as a surprise to you that all of us have an element of female DNA.
It is not unknown for testes to burst through the abdominal wall of a female at some stage.
Stanislawa Walasiewiez a Polish born athlete won a gold at the Olympics in 1932. Just to add topic relevance she was shot dead during a robber at her home in Cleveland Ohio in 1982. At the postmortem internal testes were discovered.
The conditions and mechanisms for sexual ambiguity are many, as are the forms it takes. Not the use of sex is different to gender the latter being assigned as a label whereas the former is a matter of state.
For more reading see Y: The Descent of Men’ by Steve Jones.
In particular the chapter ‘Seven Ages of Manhood’
Terms of endowment
Re: Rick A ““The right of the people” is used in the 1st amendment, the 2nd amendment, and the 4th amendment. No person was used in the 5th amendment. And just “the people” was used in the 9th and 10th.
So I think Heller was well decided . . . . The 2nd amendment is a personal right – just like the 1st and 4th (for example).”
That’s IT! Thousands of people including children have died because of that anal retentive word-gaming! There’s a damn good reason to dislike lawyers if word-gaming is more important to them than common sense.
Speaking of words, why are the words “well-regulated militia” not a clear signal that some regulation was thought to be needed. There aren’t any real militias anymore (I don’t count those groups whose members are now being sent to prison for insurrection etc.); Their job is now apportioned among the police, a standing army & National Guard, and various other groups that are (or are supposed to be) well-regulated.
The destructive power of one shooter is now equivalent to many, many Revolutionary War soldiers and, unlike those soldiers, shooters now can don body armor that actually works.
Re: RickA “No matter how much they wish it, a male will not be able to get pregnant and give birth. No matter how much they wish it, a female will not be able to fertilize an egg with their own sperm (as they lack sperm production biology).
Those are the biological facts and wishing doesn’t change them. . . .”
So the definition of male and female is based entirely on the ability to get pregnant or cause a pregnancy? Does that mean that after menopause, even a former female is no longer a woman? Or a male with no sperm (or perhaps no penis) capable of fertilizing a woman (due to age, illness, or a wound) is no longer a man?
RE: “Hardening” schools.
A 2021 study looked at 133 instances of school shootings between 1980 and 2019. It found that 85% of them were done by current or former students.
After perpetrators’ use of assault rifles or submachine guns, the second factor most associated with high death tolls was the presence of a resource officer.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2776515
The matter of paying for the measures to enhance school security is little discussed. With respect to Texas, there is reason to believe the legislature will balk at adding the needed funding. Also, Abbott is apparently considering whether to request an exemption from the requirement to run public schools in the state.
https://newsone.com/4331185/texas-gov-greg-abbott-supreme-court-public-education/
Before the Uvalde shootings, Abbott cut $211 million from his state’s mental health budget.
https://www.businessinsider.com/abbott-cut-mental-health-services-funding-in-texas-2022-5?op=1
Fine research Christopher, makes most of the arguments of the gun lobby and second amendment ‘wavers’ moot.
Recent history on gun laws makes it difficult to be more than guardedly optimistic. However, there does seem to be some movement in Congress in the wake of the Uvalde atrocity. I don’t think it’s out of bounds to hope for a federal red-flag law.
Abbott proposed a red-flag law in Texas after a 2018 shooting, but “The Lege” blocked it.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/uvalde-shooting-red-flag-laws-rcna30700
Today a former resident of Uvalde weighs in with the news that the city, like many places in America, is beset by discrimination and poverty.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/29/uvalde-shooting-warning-signs-racism-poverty-guns/
And the Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty gives us a brief history of Abbott’s action on shootings, noting that Texas ranks dead last in availability of mental health treatment.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/29/greg-abbott-uvalde-texas-school-shooting-vows-change-again/
The insanity of the US gun culture is clear. If nothing is done to change the thinking of the minority who use fatuous arguments involving the second amendment then ultimate destruction of the US as a civilized society is assured.
That second amendment is an anachronism and a destructive one.
US mass shootings will continue until the majority can overrule the minority
“The insanity of the US gun culture is clear. If nothing is done to change the thinking of the minority who use fatuous arguments involving the second amendment then ultimate destruction of the US as a civilized society is assured.”
Demonizing 80+ million law-abiding responsible American gun owners in order to win an internet argument is not the way forward.
The number of legal gun owners involved in mass school shootings is a rounding error to zero. The number of legal gun owners involved in any gun violence against innocents is a rounding error to zero. There are two sides to this issue.
Feel free to advocate for gun control – I do. Just know that when you advocate for unconstitutional gun control measures you are not helping one single bit, unless you feel helping more Republicans get elected is a positive thing.
Feel free to advocate for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment. I think it is the wrong aspiration, but a noble one. Good luck with that, you are going to need it.
Well said Roger.
RickA
OK, Some re-education.
Richard Dawkins, ‘Unweaving the Rainbow’ page 246 of Penguin Book paperback 1999.
Now for how this can, there are other scenarios, pan out in real life study this:
The dad who gave birth: ‘Being pregnant doesn’t change me being a trans man’
Note:
Roger Lambert: “Demonizing 80+ million law-abiding responsible American gun owners in order to win an internet argument is not the way forward.”
I think of it as two gun cultures. There is the culture of legal and responsible gun owners you mention — an overwhelming majority of gun owners. Then there is the strident minority of gun owners that we constantly hear from. They complain that any measure proposed to reduce gun violence won’t accomplish its goal while at the same time is a deadly threat to their Second Amendment right to own guns; that it will leave them defenseless amid hordes of criminals who will always be able to obtain guns.
On the liberal side there is a majority who back those responsible gun-control measures, and a small minority who would like to take all firearms from private hands.
In short, on one side we have responsible gun owners and “gun loonz” — while on the other we have responsible gun controllers (many of whom own guns) and the “gun grabbers.”
The asymmetry lies in the fact that the “gun grabbers” have no clout worth mentioning, while “gun loonz”have plenty of clout because they include the leadership of the NRA (but few of the members) and have the gun manufacturers and many Republican politicians in their corner.
That sounds reasonable, Christopher.
I am probably suffering from an internet bias. Everywhere I look – at mainstream media, on the net, at this very comment thread – I see well-meaning people on the Left calling for gun seizures or bans.
I get gunsplained about the 2nd Amendment and how it doesn’t mean how the SC and other courts have interpreted it for 200 years. The only motivation I can see for this line of argument is in order to ban or seize guns. My probably biased impression is that the faction wanting seizure or bans is much larger than a small minority. But you are probably right.
My own motivation is that I have a 5-year-old grandson who will be attending kindergarten in a public school next year. I would like to feel assured he will be safe as possible. I feel quite frustrated that he likely will not be as safe as possible, and I am quite sure that my frustration is mirrored by everybody who speaks out on both sides of this issue. I am completely fed up with the extremists on the Right and the Left, who both fixate on their particular favorite of the two clauses of the 2nd to the detriment of rational debate. The Right is particularly guilty here, imo.
Meanwhile, we try to explore possible solutions despite not having decent data. Seems to me this is the first place to start – mandate the CDC to again collect the data, and institute severe penalties on anyone who doesn’t do that job faithfully. ( Supposedly, Obama restored that CDC function and was ignored). Better data could lead us to effective Red Flag laws – eg, disallowing guns to anyone guilty of harming animals, etc.
I see the Cook report is now projecting the republicans win 25-35 seats this fall.
The unethical behavior of Hillary and other democrats in trying to win 2016, with the Russian collusion hoax shown by the Sussman trial is eye opening (hopefully). Both impeachment trials were also totally uncalled for – and history will show this.
I hope we clean up the voter rolls and put good solid voter id into place before November and stop the partisan changing of laws (many of which were struck down as unconstitutional) on the eve of election. It would be nice if we could have a nice clean election – without massive ballet harvesting.
The pendulum is swinging back the other way, and I am happy about that. The democrats stupid policies have lost them share among blacks, hispanics, asians, men and young people. I am not sure women and the abortion issue is going to help much this fall – but we will see.
Free speech rights are hopefully rising and cancel culture is hopefully receding.
Hopefully, the irrationality of misusing words like men to encompass women and visa versa is also receding.
There is much to be hopeful about.
The wave of crazy people trying to commit suicide by cop and score large numbers of victims doing it is very bad and I wish I knew what to do to stop that. I don’t – other than hardening all the targets the crazies like to go for, and increasing the number of people with guns at the targets to guard against the crazy person. I think the media coverage of mass shootings is amping up this trend and not tamping it down – so hopefully we can get a more responsible media and not publicize the shooters name. Hopefully more responsible gun owners that carry can stop some of these crazy people before they begin shooting. Hopefully the guards will guard better and the cops will respond faster and be more aggressive when they get there.
In the meantime – we have to be responsible for ourselves. Because we sure cannot count on government and it takes to long for the best law enforcement to get there to help and sometimes even when they get there they don’t help (it appears).
We are going to have to defend ourselves. We are going to have to protect our homes. We are going to have to be prepared to fend off the carjacker. We are going to have to be ready to stop the crazy mass shooter. Think about that, get some gun training, arm yourselves and prepare. That is the prudent course of action and could even help prevent future tragedies.
“The unethical behavior of Hillary and other democrats in trying to win 2016,”
Which, of course, you have no evidence of.
I do agree the worst people in the country — people like you, rickA — are making themselves heard, and that should scare the shit out of decent people. The racism, misogyny, bigotry, and white nationalism you endorse are huge threats to democracy.
Each eligible citizen is entitled to one vote. And if somebody else votes it for another, or a vote is paid for – it is illegal.
I am pro-women and against men competing against women and diluting the rights they have fought so hard for for hundreds of years. Pro-woman and against men identifying as women. Pro-man and against women identifying as men. There are men and women and they don’t get to switch their biological sex just because they want to. Biological sex is an immutable characteristic, like race, national origin and age. Thoughts, surgery, hormones and clothing don’t change your DNA, where you were born or your age. Immutable characteristics like your sex, dna, and age are facts and not opinions.
I believe in equal protection – which is why I am against affirmative action (which is unconstitutional).
I believe a fetus has human rights and its life should not be ended by the intentional action of another person (just like after they are born).
I think Roe will be overturned and affirmative action will also be ruled unconstitutional. I think the right to bear arms will be expanded and defined as open carry in public spaces in all 50 states and USA territories.
These are some of my opinions – which in America I am entitled to. Nobody has to agree with me – each person is entitled to their own opinion and to express it. That is what makes America great!
I call the sworn testimony of Hillary’s campaign manager evidence. But you are so ignorant – you don’t even know what evidence is.
Hillary cheated in the primary (against Bernie) and she cheated in the election (per Mook). Hillary and the democrats are proven cheaters and the evidence shows this. Major issues with illegal ballet harvesting. Omar had major ballet harvesting issues in Minneapolis. 2000Mules gives cause to investigate this issue nationwide. They need to get rid of drop boxes and people should either mail their own ballots in or a family member should drop off at an official (non-dropbox) location (like city hall or a post office). Hopefully they will clean this up before November.
You call BLM a terrorist organization, rampant racism a myth, abortion a “baby killer”, the scientific consensus on climate change wrong, and the notion of people being transgender “not scientific”. All of your positions there have been proven wrong, so given your track record, the safest course is to say your opinion about evidence is also bullshit.
More bullshit from you. Your fantasies about the “flaws” in voting in this country would be laughable if they weren’t held by people in power who will leverage them to make sure people they don’t like can’t vote.
I note that you didn’t have any problem with trump urging folks to attack the Capitol in an attempt to stop things on January 6, so spare me your “concerns” about voting issues and integrity issues that don’t exist.
Sidenote: Five republican right-wingers who want to get on our ballot to run for governor are, currently, out of contention, because they hired volunteers to forge (from the official review of the signatures they provided) “tens of thousands of forged names”. Three of these low-lifes are suing to be reinstated because “the board of canvassers had no right to examine the names and take action”.
All five of these clowns toe the republican line that the 2020 election with stolen with voter fraud. They just want the right to commit fraud themselves, without penalty.
As you and the rest of your republican allies say rickA, consequences are for others, not us.
Hmmm – I didn’t hear Trump call for folks to attack the Capitol. I heard him urge that their voices be heard. Nothing wrong with protesting and addressing the government with your grievances. Anybody who broke the law should be prosecuted. That goes for BLM protesters who broke the law also.
We will have to agree to disagree on my other opinions, because I disagree with you on all of them.
Cheaters are bad – whether they are republican cheaters or democrat cheaters. Forging signatures is cheating. They should be disqualified from running if they cheated. There are republican cheaters and there are democrat cheaters. Our election systems should catch all cheaters and ensure only valid votes are counted and elections are fair.
RickA
Strawman. I have already provided testimony and evidence that you are ignoring the realities for many. Enough of your wilful ignorance.
Really – the Dad who gave birth?
That is just a woman doing what their biology permits them to do.
Conceive and bear a child.
That is not evidence of anything.
If anything is is evidence that trans-men are women (which is my point of view).
Not admitting error when pointed out is a sign that you have an incredibly fragile ego also this indicates psychological rigidity. You are one who ignores valid points of the whole picture to ‘win’ an argument. You should be a lawyer. Wait, you are.
You don’t expect the (essentially professional) science denier to yield to pesky things like facts and data do you Lionel A?
Imagine the world view he must be in where every flippin’ thing he believes about science, society, history, and politics, is the exact opposite of reality. It speaks volumes about his low IQ and even lower integrity.
RickA in his little info bubble opined:
When Republicans could be up to all manner of very dirty tricks.
Republican party building an ‘army’ to overturn election results – report
I guess RickA could be one of those lawyers for he certainly has no interest in fair and free elections with everybody allowed to vote able to do so without intimidation.
As for Trump’s innocence, according to the biased head in a box RickA over the Capitol attack this is the reality:
Trump calls Capitol attack an ‘insurrection hoax’ as public hearings set to begin
But do not expect RickA to acknowledge evident truth for he is sure to reply with slippery phrases.
Well, given that he’s stupid enough to continually repeat the lie that there are major problems with the voting system (when the only flaw he’s concerned about is that the poor and minorities are allowed to vote) and that actions by companies such as Twitter to block people who repeatedly violate terms of service infringes on free speech, there’s a good chance you’re right.
He already is on record as responding to a comment about the traitors’ attack on the Capitol with “Attack? Where were the weapons?” so it’s a sure thing he’ll show his “belief in evidence” is pure BS by writing your information off as well.
Re: RickA “We are going to have to defend ourselves. We are going to have to protect our homes. We are going to have to be prepared to fend off the carjacker. We are going to have to be ready to stop the crazy mass shooter. Think about that, get some gun training, arm yourselves and prepare. That is the prudent course of action and could even help prevent future tragedies.”
Do you have a real world example of a town or city where a large percentage of the public got guns, gun training, then prepared themselves, and the result wasn’t carnage among innocent people? A bunch of jumpy people with loaded guns in hand (or nearby, loaded and easily available), and expecting trouble. And RickA thinks that makes an area safer? Amazing. Doesn’t it sound more like a recipe for some dead or wounded kids who sneaked dad’s gun out and played with it, or a dead or wounded family member coming home unexpectedly, or perhaps a neighbor terminated with extreme prejudice while retrieving something that blew into the yard next-door? (Or, perhaps, it’s just a rip-off of the Magnificent Seven.)
RickA clearly has no concept of escalation, the logical progression would be citizens arming themselves with mini-nukes or chemical (shudder) weapons.
That ‘mismatch between problems and responses’
The fixation with guns is an American nightmare
The gun lobby is living in awe to a past idea which is no longer relevant to modern society
America, how long will you sacrifice your children on the altar of gun worship?
RickA may consider himself to be a reasonable, responsible adult however his lack of clear vision on this issue, a lack of clarity which has produced such ill thought out and murderous ideals as those picked out by Tyvor Winn.
Re: RickA “Hmmm – I didn’t hear Trump call for folks to attack the Capitol. I heard him urge that their voices be heard. Nothing wrong with protesting and addressing the government with your grievances. ”
Did you turn off your tv once you had heard Trump “urge that their voices be heard” and thereby miss all that I and many others heard and saw?
I submit that you didn’t hear Trump call for folks to attack the Capitol because he phrased it like the mob boss he is; you know, like: “I need Rico to go away” as boss-speak for “I need Rico dead.” Maybe you were too dim to catch that but much of his mob did. Then I and much of the U. S. and elsewhere definitely heard him say “I’ll be there with you. Then, after lying to his own followers, he went to watch the carnage on tv, doing nothing to discourage or disperse them, or counter their chant of “Hang Mike Pence” (for the disloyalty of following the Constitution), despite urgent pleas from his own family and many other Republicans to call the mob off. After waiting for several hours, and after they’d wounded all the police they could, and broken, trashed, crapped on, and/or stolen all that they could, he gently told them “Go home” and “We love you” to the mob.” I heard it and anyone else without right wing ear plugs heard it too. Not an opinion, a pure fact.
“The gun lobby is living in awe to a past idea which is no longer relevant to modern society”
I know it is a stretch, but we are closer to a Right-wing fascistic takeover than ever before in our history. Being Leftish and armed is something that some are actually talking about. Maybe the Founders in their fear of tyranny are not so irrelevant after all.
Re: Lionel A “America’s great appeal to the world was its promise of possibility. It presented itself as virgin territory, a tabula rasa where a society could form anew, free of the past, and where individuals might do the same, reinventing themselves, renewing themselves, starting over. It was a myth, of course: it took no account of those people who were already there, and whose lives and lands were taken, or of those who had been brought to America in shackles. But it was a powerful myth all the same, one whose grip on the global imagination lives on: . . .”
If I were writing a book about American history for high school students I would put that in it (asking permission from Lionel A, of course). It says something of the best of the U. S. A. and the worst, which is important for a history to contain. It might even generate questions among the students about “those people who were already there . . . [and] those who had been brought to America in shackles, and what happened and is still happening to them.
Actually, I’d likely put the entire post in there, at or near the beginning of the book.
Tyvor
I cannot lay claim to those words for they were from Jonathan Freedland of the Guardian, see link in OP.
Thank you. I skipped right over the link in red. Thanks for positing it here, then, or I probably would have missed it in The Guardian.
Re: RickA “I believe in equal protection – which is why I am against affirmative action (which is unconstitutional).”
Affirmative action IS equal protection; its rebalancing action is protection against an obvious bias against people of a certain ethnicity, race, religious belief, and/or gender unrelated to their ability or suitability for a position or benefit. What could be more equal than that. Perhaps it could even be extended to lawyers, who in the minds of many people are blood-sucking vermin. (Not my opinion, of course.]
“I believe a fetus has human rights and its life should not be ended by the intentional action of another person (just like after they are born).”
Wouldn’t that also apply to spermatozoa and eggs? If not, why not? They are alive and if not killed or interfered with “by the intentional action of ” some person could combine and make a precursor to a fetus. Isn’t that close enough for a pro-life advocate? If so, shouldn’t that make masturbation a crime?
Two wrongs don’t make a right. You cannot discriminate against one skin color today to address discrimination against another skin color years or decades ago. Equal protection means treating everybody the same under the law today. Not treating people dis-equally under the law today. You FAIL!
A fetus is a human being. A sperm is not a human being. An egg is not a human being. It takes both a sperm and an egg to make a human being (a fertilized egg, which will grow into an adult human being). A six month old fetus is a human being, just like a a one year old baby is a human being. Just as you cannot murder a one year old human being, you cannot murder a six month old pre-born human being. Birth does not magically create a human being or a person. Birth is just a stage in growing into a human adult. That is why we call it your birth day and not your “I am a human now” day.
Murder is the intentional killing of a human being – whether they are born or not. That is my opinion – yours may be different.
Some states make feticide a crime (i.e. the intentional killing of a fetus, say by kicking a pregnant woman in the belly). Why the big deal? My body my choice. Well it is a big deal when you want the child and somebody else takes that choice away from you. It is the mother’s of the murdered fetuses who advocated for these laws.
Some states make it a crime to drink to much during pregnancy or taking crack or other illegal drugs during pregnancy. Why doesn’t “my body, my choice” operate here?
Because there are two bodies involved – two human beings. It is true that one is inside the other. But it is still two separate human beings. Two heads – one for each. Four arms – two for each. Four legs – two for each. Even for Siamese twins, one body two heads – it would be murder for a third party to intentionally kill one of the two twins (absent medical necessity – which is a self-defense argument). Medical necessity can justify abortion – say an ectopic pregnancy. Before viability there is no way to save both. However, after viability if both can be saved – I would argue there is a duty to save both (if possible).
Couldn’t the woman say she owns the fetus (of the clump of cells as pro-choice people like to say). No, in my opinion. The 13th amendment made owning another human being against the law. Owning the fetus is slavery – and we don’t allow that in America. Same argument for killing a one year old – you cannot do it because you cannot own a child and therefore it is murder. A one year old is just as dependent on a parent as a fetus is on its mother – but that doesn’t make the fetus a non-human.
Again – just my opinion. Your opinion may be different.
And yes – I realize my opinion makes the storing of fertilized eggs legally problematic. Ditto for flushing them down the drain. Or arguing that the fertilized eggs are property.
Well we can always amend the constitution to make slavery legal again (if we want to go down that road – I do not).
That is why the word asinine was invented. ‘Asinine behaviour isn’t simply dumb, but is as obstinate and lacking in judgement as a stubborn donkey’, which is the republican way in these times.
Your opinion is almost invariably problematic, problematic to the point of being perverse.
I wonder if Mike Risk has continued to follow.
“ Because there are two bodies involved – two human being”
Well no, you idiot, that’s not true at all. But it is an issue of science, and we know you are more than willing to ignore science when you don’t like what it says.
“ Re: RickA “I believe in equal protection – which is why I am against affirmative action (which is unconstitutional).””
No, you are against any policy that includes benefits for minorities because you’re a racist.
What RickA, and his ilk, are trying to hand wave away.
Current Causes of Death in Children and Adolescents in the United States
RickA’s intransigence gives policy makers cover to delay meaningful action, after all this is what the weapon manufacturers pay for and support the NRA for. If the source of these self inflicted wounds to society are not halted then the US will relapse into anarchy, especially if the GOPs drive to arm more is a success.
I guess that there is no cure for stupid, insanity even, insanity has been defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
Re: RickA “Two wrongs don’t make a right. You cannot discriminate against one skin color today to address discrimination against another skin color years or decades ago. Equal protection means treating everybody the same under the law today. Not treating people dis-equally under the law today. You FAIL!”
Oh, are you under the impression that the days of unwarranted discrimination are over? They’ve just gotten better at covering it up. Lots of places won’t tell anyone while they were fired. Why do you suppose they do that?
Re: RickA “A sperm is not a human being. An egg is not a human being. It takes both a sperm and an egg to make a human being (a fertilized egg, which will grow into an adult human being).
I’m glad you feel that way. There’s a lot of talk about the next step after getting rid of abortions (except for rich people) on the right-wing agenda is to end easy access to contraception (except for rich people).
Indeed, and as with creationism/intelligent design having gained ground along with religious fundamentalism, check out the reality of Southern Baptists, and this lethal attitude to gun ownership that has lead to guns being the leading cause of death amongst children and adolescents, we see the USA transforming itself into Usistan.
Texas School Shooting: Guns are the Top Cause of Death for U.S. Children
RickA’s unwillingness to consider that if the constitution and parts thereof form a roadblock to action to ameliorate this carnage marks him out as a reactionary threat to children and the future of the USA..
Re: me “Lots of places won’t tell anyone while they were fired.”
Of course I meant to type “‘why’ they were fired.”
And now we know the “Hillary’s lawyer lied” stuff was pure bullshit, same as the “her campaign spied on trump” and “she was responsible for the deaths of Americans in Benghazi” stuff. It seems there is no lie to blatant for the right to push as long as there are ignoramuses like rickA who will believe them and spread them.
The errant and deadly wiring of the Republican brain.
leading to a total logic fail amongst Republican legislators.
Nearly half of Republicans think US has to live with mass shootings, poll finds
And these illogical types prove that they are thus by claiming Pro-Life. Insane by that classic definition of that state.
Yup. Folks on the right, like our resident right-wing loon, are pro-life for the first nine months because they like forcing women to do their bidding. After the kid is born it’s simply viewed as a target.
In other republican/hypocritical news: here in MI 3 of the republicans who wanted to be on the fall ballot for governor had their people commit massive fraud to have enough signatures to make it to the ballot: their folks falsified thousands of signatures. Of course, they all got caught and so aren’t eligible for the ballot. One, a clown who runs a consulting business and calls himself a “quality guru”, who falsely claims biden stole the election through fraud, is upset he isn’t allowed to commit fraud and is trying to get a court to allow him in.
Then, this morning, one of the republican candidates who didn’t commit fraud on his application was arrested for his part in the trump inspired and supported January 6 domestic terrorist attack on the Capitol.
And New York has this guy.
https://www.mediamatters.org/diversity-discrimination/carl-paladino-hitler-kind-leader-we-need-today-we-need-somebody?
Only the best people are trump supporters — if by best you mean completely lacking in honesty and integrity and being blatantly racist while supporting nazis.
RickA worries about voter fraud by those who in reality would safeguard the constitution in a fair election. Does he care about the coaches and horses the Republicans are engineering to totally distort, no destroy the democratic process?
Trump’s forces are preparing for the next storming of the Capitol. This time, they plan to win
Hanging chads reinforced the trend started by Tricky Dicky and then Ronnie Raygun and onto Trump. The creatures of Nathan Bedford Forrest could return in force, nobody wins, well Putin may grin, if such comes to pass.
One thing struck me as particularly important which was brought out in the first tele-vised hearing of the Jan. 6 committee was that the Proud Boys didn’t come to D. C. for Trump’s speech, they and their embedded cameraman(!) began walking to the Capitol before Trump even began to speak. Their task was to reconnoiter the Capitol area, looking for the more weakly defended points where breakthroughs could be most easily achieved. That doesn’t look at all like a boisterous crowd getting out of hand. It looks like a planned attack. And it worked. When the crowd stirred up by Trump and told by him to “go to the Capitol” and “I’ll be with you.” (a lie of course; he’s a coward) arrived at the Capitol later, the early work was already done and they were able to break through in multiple places.
No wonder Faux News didn’t carry any of the hearing and spent their time (without com-mercials) telling their deluded audience one lie after the next.
By the way, don’t expect much from the Trump, Republicans, or Faux News on any form of useful gun control. They have now embraced sociopathy as the way to act.
The dangers of letting those responsible, including those in positions of influence (media) or power (senators and congressmen and state governors) off the hook for their part in what was an insurrection are spelt out here:
As we see daily, bigotry and prejudice against those of a different skin colour are still too prevalent if not always overt. This must be dealt with.
If America fails to punish its insurrectionists, it could see a wave of domestic terror
Hence the mention of Nathan Bedford Forrest in the previous post.
Some more of trump’s “best people” and rickA similar folks showing their true selves.
https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/JFK-QAnon-cult-harassed-gun-violence-protestors-17238529.php?
Strewth dean, there is no dealing with that scale of delusion.
I mean:
Sickening. Protzman needs urgent psychiatric treatment.
Re: RickA “If the “good guy with a gun” idea is pure bullshit – why are law enforcement armed?”
Well, according to the news media, here are two examples:
1) To wait inside a school in which a teen-aged killer has opened fire on children and teachers while some of the victims bled out on the floor because the nitwit who was supposedly in charge was phoneless and useless. (He has now clammed up until the inept and/or heartless TX governor wins re-election.)
2) To shoot unarmed black men who have their backs turned or are handcuffed (but steering clear of white men parading about in military gear and brandishing long guns).
The Texas QOP party has leaders who are as stupid as rickA. These anti-democracy people are dangerous.
https://hillreporter.com/texas-gop-convention-passes-resolution-declaring-joe-biden-not-legitimately-elected-133774
The title describes the goal rickA and the rest of the modern right have for the country: abandoning democracy. These people are dangerous.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/19/opinions/texas-gop-convention-obeidallah/index.html?
Re: dean “The title describes the goal rickA and the rest of the modern right have for the country: abandoning democracy. ”
It’s becoming all too apparent that the lessons of the 1930s have faded over time and many in the western world are once again flirting with autocracy. Between the bell-shaped curve of intelligence and the Dunning-Kruger effect, the 21st century is not likely to end well.
Re: Tyvor Winn “It’s becoming all too apparent that the lessons of the 1930s have faded over time . . .”
When I wrote this I had not yet heard about the Texas state Republicans newest treason: a 200+ page platform which, among other things, repeats the Big Lie, asserts that 2nd Amendment rights can not be curtailed in any way, wants the federal income tax abolished, the Confederate monuments protected (and those removed returned), and asserts the right to leave the Union. I’ve heard or read nothing yet about slavery made legal again or concentration camps for those who register as Democrats but both would seem to be a good fit for this ultra ultra conservative party. Heil Abbot.
Yes, because the truth is too painful for the primitive republican mind, with thinking as primitive as that of the Taliban.
When it comes to January 6, Republicans are entirely divorced from reality
Being divorced from reality is what these clownshoes are across many important topics.