7-year-old trick-or-treater shot in Chicago

notobtuse

AllForIt wrote: »

I really can't understand why as a global society we don't acknowledge the fact that their are incurable nutters out there who are beyond any kind of help, are most likely not receiving any kind of medical supervision and neither is there any help available anyway. If you live in a city you'll most likely pass by one of these kinds of ppl on the street once a day. These types of people will not be monitored, will not be knows to mental health services, will pass an insanity test and can buy a firearm in the US whether background checks are brought in or not. Therefore the only sensible thing to do is ban the sale of firearms to all and sundry and replace it with a much more heavily restricted system. I realize this is not going to happen in the US anytime soon but I really don't see any alternative if one is serious about preventing all these needless tragic deaths.

Taking away a Right provided us in the US Constitution requires a 2/3 vote in Congress. I'll never see it happen in my lifetime. And even if it would be voted on, if you think every US citizen would give up their firearms voluntarily you believe in pipe dreams. Fear of having the government take away your guns, which gives them ultimate power over you, is exactly the reason the founding fathers enacted the second amendment in the first place. It would result in another civil war.

notobtuse

Nuclear Propulsion wrote: »

Someone please explain how gun control is going to stop black and Hispanic gangs killing each other (and innocent people in the crossfire)?

Whites and Asians participate in gangs, also. Stricter gun laws wouldn’t help because they only affect law-abiding citizens. The way to curb gang gun violence is stricter alcohol policies, hot-spot policing, focused deterrence policing, raise the age or grade for dropping out of school, behavioral intervention programs, and eliminate blighted housing.

ArnoldJRimmer

notobtuse wrote: »

Taking away a Right provided us in the US Constitution requires a 2/3 vote in Congress. I'll never see it happen in my lifetime. And even if it would be voted on, if you think every US citizen would give up their firearms voluntarily you believe in pipe dreams. Fear of having the government take away your guns, which gives them ultimate power over you, is exactly the reason the founding fathers enacted the second amendment in the first place. It would result in another civil war.

You're going to have to explain this one to me, what additional power will the government have if there is gun control, or in your scenario, a ban on all guns? Its not the 1700's anymore, the US has a functioning democracy. Do you expect Mitch McConnell or Elizabeth Warren to start shooting everyone who disagrees with them in the knowledge that their opponents wont be armed?

You are right in that there is fierce opposition to any kind of gun control, which is disappointing as there has to be a middle ground somewhere. But if the NRA refuses to engage, or even admit that there is a problem, then these unnecessary deaths will continue.

notobtuse

ArnoldJRimmer wrote: »

You're going to have to explain this one to me, what additional power will the government have if there is gun control, or in your scenario, a ban on all guns? Its not the 1700's anymore, the US has a functioning democracy. Do you expect Mitch McConnell or Elizabeth Warren to start shooting everyone who disagrees with them in the knowledge that their opponents wont be armed?

You are right in that there is fierce opposition to any kind of gun control, which is disappointing as there has to be a middle ground somewhere. But if the NRA refuses to engage, or even admit that there is a problem, then these unnecessary deaths will continue.

History of repressive regimes shows gun confiscation is one of the first steps in consolidating government power. Here are some of the thinkings of some Founding Fathers in their own words...

"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined..."
- George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

"On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823

"I enclose you a list of the killed, wounded, and captives of the enemy from the commencement of hostilities at Lexington in April, 1775, until November, 1777, since which there has been no event of any consequence ... I think that upon the whole it has been about one half the number lost by them, in some instances more, but in others less. This difference is ascribed to our superiority in taking aim when we fire; every soldier in our army having been intimate with his gun from his infancy."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Giovanni Fabbroni, June 8, 1778

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

"To disarm the people...s the most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

"...the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone..."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
- William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty.... The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."
- St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803

"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like law, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance ofpower is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one-half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong. The history of every age and nation establishes these truths, and facts need but little arguments when they prove themselves."
- Thomas Paine, "Thoughts on Defensive War" in Pennsylvania Magazine, July 1775

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
- Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833

"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty .... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."
- Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789

"For it is a truth, which the experience of ages has attested, that the people are always most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 25, December 21, 1787

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

"f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, January 10, 1788

"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
- Tench Coxe, Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789

MadYaker

350 million fire arms legally registered in the US and god knows how many illegally held ones. That’s the main problem and there’s no solving it. Every country has crazy people but unlike most countries in the USA they can easily get their hands on guns because there’s just so many be they illegally or legally owned.

How do solve that problem? Revoking the 2nd will never happen. Even if it did would everyone just hand over their guns? Would they fcuk. This is going to keep happening and nothing will change. No matter how many mass shootings happen it only directly affects a tiny % of Americans and the rest don’t care.

Ave Sodalis

I think this is relevant, in light of certain poster's attempts to defend America's current gun policy:

marieholmfan

notobtuse wrote: »

History of repressive regimes shows gun confiscation is one of the first steps in consolidating government power. Here are some of the thinkings of some Founding Fathers in their own words...

Thomas Jefferson raped a twelve year old slave girl.

Boggles

notobtuse wrote: »

Fear of having the government take away your guns, which gives them ultimate power over you, is exactly the reason the founding fathers enacted the second amendment in the first place. It would result in another civil war.

And there you have the problem in a nutshell.

Loony Tunes.

igCorcaigh

MadYaker wrote: »

350 million fire arms legally registered in the US and god knows how many illegally held ones. That’s the main problem and there’s no solving it. Every country has crazy people but unlike most countries in the USA they can easily get their hands on guns because there’s just so many be they illegally or legally owned.

How do solve that problem? Revoking the 2nd will never happen. Even if it did would everyone just hand over their guns? Would they fcuk. This is going to keep happening and nothing will change. No matter how many mass shootings happen it only directly affects a tiny % of Americans and the rest don’t care.

I think there is something else going on with the US cultural mindset though. Even without the guns, it's a crazy society.

Boggles

TeaBagMania wrote: »

and it also saves lives

this pregnant mother killed TWO gun toting home invaders with her AR-15

wont find this story on CNN

https://nypost.com/2019/11/04/pregnant-florida-mom-uses-ar-15-to-kill-home-intruder/

https://us.cnn.com/2019/11/04/us/florida-home-invasion-pregnant-woman-ar-15/index.html

Your tinfoil is showing.

TeaBagMania

TeaBagMania wrote: »

and it also saves lives

this pregnant mother killed TWO gun toting home invaders with her AR-15

wont find this story on CNN

https://nypost.com/2019/11/04/pregnant-florida-mom-uses-ar-15-to-kill-home-intruder/

We need to arm our trick-or-treaters

nkl12xtw5goz70

notobtuse wrote: »

Fear of having the government take away your guns, which gives them ultimate power over you, is exactly the reason the founding fathers enacted the second amendment in the first place.

A lone gunman or even a local militia wouldn't stand a chance against the military might of the US government. So the government still has ultimate power, whether citizens are armed or not.

BattleCorp

Itzel Breezy Abalone wrote: »

A lone gunman or even a local militia wouldn't stand a chance against the military might of the US government. So the government still has ultimate power, whether citizens are armed or not.

I'm not advocating this but an armed resistance against the might of the US military stands a better chance than an unarmed resistance.

They could engage in a guerilla campaign against the Government/Military. If they are unarmed, they can do fcukall against the Government/Military.

BattleCorp

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm not advocating this but an armed resistance against the might of the US military stands a better chance than an unarmed resistance.

They could engage in a guerilla campaign against the Government/Military. If they are unarmed, they can do fcukall against the Government/Military.

They'd be labeled terrorists and they wouldn't get off the ground. If they did, what good does an assault rifle do against a drone strike. The 2nd amendment made sense when all anyone had was muskets.

Boggles

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm not advocating this but an armed resistance against the might of the US military stands a better chance than an unarmed resistance.

They could engage in a guerilla campaign against the Government/Military. If they are unarmed, they can do fcukall against the Government/Military.

Hang on a sec, why are the US military or government attacking their citizens?

Cletus the coal miner and boys riding around in the back of pickups shooting at signs aside.

BattleCorp

Deleted User wrote: »

They'd be labeled terrorists and they wouldn't get off the ground. If they did, what good does an assault rifle do against a drone strike. The 2nd amendment made sense when all anyone had was muskets.

Guerilla warfare means that the government don't know where to fire the drones. The UK had nuclear weapons but they were no use against the IRA.

Plenty of terrorist campaigns have ended in success. One example is Nelson Mandela's in South Africa. He was a terrorist who bombed schools but eventually had success in bringing down the Apartheid Government.

BattleCorp

Boggles wrote: »

Hang on a sec, why are the US military or government attacking their citizens?

Cletus the coal miner and boys riding around in the back of pickups shooting at signs aside.

I'm not saying that the US military or Government will attack their citizens. I'm just stating that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to keep the Government in check and prevent them running amok.

I'm not agreeing with the 2nd Amendment by the way.

JCDUB

notobtuse wrote: »

varmints

Jesus wept.

This, right here, is gun totin' Murica.

Boggles

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm not saying that the US military or Government will attack their citizens. I'm just stating that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to keep the Government in check and prevent them running amok.

Not exactly, but that is a wide varying debate.

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

The start of the sentence is the most important.

In recent times it would probably apply to the likes of National Guard, not Dwayne and his bowling team forming a militia just because......

Anyway it's an absolute nonsense pretense from what is a fairly outdated historical document.

BattleCorp

BattleCorp wrote: »

Guerilla warfare means that the government don't know where to fire the drones. The UK had nuclear weapons but they were no use against the IRA.

Plenty of terrorist campaigns have ended in success. One example is Nelson Mandela's in South Africa. He was a terrorist who bombed schools but eventually had success in bringing down the Apartheid Government.

Apartheid was actually defeated by not allowing the South Africa rugby team to compete in the world cup. Everyone knows that.

BattleCorp

varmints

JCDUB wrote: »

Jesus wept.

This, right here, is gun totin' Murica.

Varmints has two meanings. One meaning a troublesome child and the other is a category of small animal.

Seeing as the person mentioned varmints in a paragraph about hunting where they mentioned lots of animals leads me to believe that the person was talking about small animals.

The fact that he was talking about cheap ammo also leads me to believe he was talking about .22lr ammo which is usually used on small animals and not on troublesom children.

Transginger

The poor kid. Childhood stolen.

TeaBagMania

notobtuse wrote: »

History of repressive regimes shows gun confiscation is one of the first steps in consolidating government power.

so true, Germany started with registration, dont take my word Kitty Werthmann was there and lived it.

Skip to around 7:40 to hear Kitty speak...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NcQemQ2bGg

and another from Kitty https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u__rs1LeHHE

notobtuse

JCDUB wrote: »

Jesus wept.

This, right here, is gun totin' Murica.

Oh, bother. I live in the country. Coyotes attack small dogs, cats and are a danger to small children. Groundhogs destroy property and carry disease that is passed onto pets if confronted. Skunks destroy lawns and are bothersome nuisances. I’ve tried yelling at them to go away, but their comprehension skills have much to be desired. :rolleyes:

notobtuse

Itzel Breezy Abalone wrote: »

A lone gunman or even a local militia wouldn't stand a chance against the military might of the US government. So the government still has ultimate power, whether citizens are armed or not.

Sure they can. Vast armed numbers would win in the end.

notobtuse

ArnoldJRimmer wrote: »

You're going to have to explain this one to me, what additional power will the government have if there is gun control, or in your scenario, a ban on all guns? Its not the 1700's anymore, the US has a functioning democracy. Do you expect Mitch McConnell or Elizabeth Warren to start shooting everyone who disagrees with them in the knowledge that their opponents wont be armed?

You are right in that there is fierce opposition to any kind of gun control, which is disappointing as there has to be a middle ground somewhere. But if the NRA refuses to engage, or even admit that there is a problem, then these unnecessary deaths will continue.

Rifled muskets were the AK-47 of the day.

And we are a constitutional republic. We don’t function by mob rule.

Boggles

notobtuse wrote: »

Sure they can. Vast armed numbers would win in the end.

About 40% of Americans are obese.

They ain't winning shít.

BattleCorp

Boggles wrote: »

About 40% of Americans are obese.

They ain't winning shít.

I'm quite obese myself. Still well able to shoot a gun.

Boggles

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm quite obese myself. Still well able to shoot a gun.

Sure but unless the 'ultimate battle' is over in a few hours and not years.

It will be less of "out of my cold dead hands" and more of yeah "I'll give up if you give me donuts or my diabetes medicine".

PostWoke

Boggles wrote: »

About 40% of Americans are obese.

They ain't winning shít.

If only they had machinery of some kind.

This girl still alive?