With gun control a very hot topic...

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:You know I was thinking it while we were talking but I didn’t say it, but in light of the shooting in nashville- some misguided plan regarding locking up as many children as possible for thought crimes ignores the reality that a lot of the time it’s not a current student doing the shooting. And you’re creating even more people that might harbor negative feelings toward their past school instead of forgetting about it like everyone else does

GRR Spartan wrote:Looks like TravelinMan is well read if he took umbriridge to the Lennie Small reference.

I quit trying to have any serious dialog with TravelinMan because he posts shit he knows isn’t factual or is nonsense.

The velocity of an AR15 style assault rifle hits the human target is much faster than a Glock or other pistols.  It’s round has a wavering action as it hits the target while a round from a Glock does damage but tends to take a straight lane.

For example if some is hit with a shot from an AR15 it shatters bone and then damages internal organs or if it misses the head, sternum, ribs and hits lungs, liver, stomach, intestines the impact turns the soft tissue organs into jelly at the entry site.  

TravelinMan knows this.  He’s here with his Lennie Small playbook and Thoughts and Prayers e-cards.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Agreed.  

In action it is much messier than being able to see in hindsight that these two kids needed more support to keep them from committing murder.

Eliminating guns, is the easier practical solution, rather than trying to predict who will misbehave with them.

Yeah, other than the civil war that will erupt when you try to take people's guns, it will be a piece of cake.

We yanked violent kids out of school in the 70's and 80's.  We can do it again. And heck, let's even leave guns out of the discussion on this one. Think of the stabbings and fights that will be prevented. Stop coddling violent kids. Put them in a facility that is equipped to deal with them properly.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I found this to be pretty surprising tbh pervis. This is the dude that represents the district doing his best ‍� impression

[tw]1640512268927418368[/tw]

We’re the only developed country in the world that unconditionally allows civilians to own military-style assault weapons, that allows “open carry,” and that lets gun manufacturers openly buy politicians (thanks, Republicans on the Supreme Court).

As a consequence, we’re also the only country in the world where the leading cause of death for children is being blown apart by bullets.

Meanwhile, we don’t have to wonder what the Founding Fathers meant by a “well regulated Militia,” because one of the leading architects of the new republic, Alexander Hamilton, defined it for us in the Federalist Papers, which paved the way for the Constitutional Convention.

Furthermore, his description fits exactly with everything else we know about the Founding Fathers — what they were concerned about, what outcomes they preferred and what they designed the new Constitution to do.

In Federalist No. 29, Hamilton explained at great length precisely what a well-regulated militia was, why the Founding Fathers thought we needed one and why they wanted to protect it from being disarmed by the federal government.

And there’s a very good reason the most extreme gun promoters never, ever direct you to that 1788 essay.

The term well-regulated militia didn’t refer to readers of Soldier of Fortune magazine running around in the woods with AR-15s and war paint on their faces. Hamilton defined it basically as what today we call the National Guard (although that was founded much later).

It should be a properly constituted, ordered and drilled (“well-regulated”) military force, organized state by state, he explained. Each state militia should be a “select corps,” “well-trained” and able to perform all the “operations of an army.” The militia needed “uniformity in … organization and discipline,” he wrote, so that it could operate like a proper army “in camp and field,” and so that it could gain the “essential … degree of proficiency in military functions.” And, although it was organized state by state, it needed to be under the ultimate control of the national government. The “well-regulated militia” was under the command of the president. It was “the military arm” of the government.

The Founding Fathers didn’t want the U.S. government to have an army made up of full-time, professional soldiers. That was precisely what they had just fought a revolutionary war against. King George’s redcoats were professional mercenaries. But the architects of the new republic knew it needed some kind of military force for defense against enemies foreign and domestic.

That’s why they wanted America’s military force to be made up of part-time volunteers drawn from the ranks of regular citizens. Such citizens, they argued, couldn’t be used by a tyrant against the population the way professional mercenaries could.

The creation of this well-regulated militia of part-time volunteers would help safeguard the freedom of the new republic because it would make the creation of a professional, mercenary army unnecessary, Hamilton wrote. “This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it,” he explained.

That was the point. And that was why they wanted to make sure it couldn’t be disarmed by the federal government — so that a future tyrant couldn’t disarm the National Guard and then use a mercenary army to impose martial law.

The Founding Fathers didn’t call the republic’s new force an “army” because that term called to mind the British Army, foreign mercenaries, tyrants and kings. So they said “militia” instead. But they meant a real body. Hamilton was scathing about the idea that the militia could simply mean every Bob, Billy and Benjamin with his musket. Such amateurs would stand no chance in modern warfare, he wrote. And requiring every citizen to serve in the military would be ridiculous, he said. It would be “a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss,” he wrote. Taking people away from their work in order to train them for battle “would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country.”

The Second Amendment is an instrument of government. It’s not about hunting or gun collecting or carrying your pistol into the saloon. Sure, those may all be valued by some. But the Founding Fathers left it up to us to pass sensible laws about all these things. The Constitution is about government.

Over the past 150 years, American gun owners have gone from viewing their weapons largely as utilitarian farm tools to weapons that provide both a feeling of physical security and a sense of psychological solace. Guns’ importance to their owners now goes much deeper than merely being implements of self-defense.

University of Wisconsin–Madison researcher and assistant professor Nick Buttrick studies the psychological relationship that millions of Americans have with their guns. Buttrick’s research builds on the historical record to show that in the U.S.—the only country with more civilian firearms than people—white Southerners started cultivating the tradition of the home arsenal immediately after the Civil War because of insecurities and racial fears. During the rest of the 19th century, those anxieties metamorphosized into a fetishization of the firearm to the point that, in the present day, gun owners view their weapons as adding meaning and a sense of purpose to their lives.

in interviews with 10 pistol owners here in Michigan’s gun belt, the measures are met with surprisingly little resistance, and in some cases, support. Mass shootings at Oxford High School and Michigan State University convinced some that gun reforms are worth a shot. And they say they worry about gun violence, too  — it’s why they try to protect themselves with guns of their own.

“I have mixed feelings,” said Comoford, a lifelong resident of Montmorency. “I don’t know if it (the gun measures) will do what they think it will. We all think something more needs to be done. We just don’t know what.”

Floyd Robertson wrote:[tw]1641131375087566867[/tw]

in interviews with 10 pistol owners here in Michigan’s gun belt, the measures are met with surprisingly little resistance, and in some cases, support. Mass shootings at Oxford High School and Michigan State University convinced some that gun reforms are worth a shot. And they say they worry about gun violence, too  — it’s why they try to protect themselves with guns of their own.

“I have mixed feelings,” said Comoford, a lifelong resident of Montmorency. “I don’t know if it (the gun measures) will do what they think it will. We all think something more needs to be done. We just don’t know what.”

1. Do anything and find out if works.
2. Ban the effing ARs like Clinton did.

Jake from State Farm wrote:Dead School Children are a Sign of America’s Trump-Fueled Fascism Problem

According to a new Kaiser Family Foundation poll, 21% of Americans have been threatened with a gun, 19% tell researchers a family member was killed by a gun, and 17% say they’ve seen someone shot in front of them. Fully 54 percent of Americans or members of their family have had one of these experiences.

Eighty-four percent of Americans consider how to avoid getting shot when they go out in public.

Trapper Gus wrote:

According to a new Kaiser Family Foundation poll, 21% of Americans have been threatened with a gun, 19% tell researchers a family member was killed by a gun, and 17% say they’ve seen someone shot in front of them. Fully 54 percent of Americans or members of their family have had one of these experiences.

Eighty-four percent of Americans consider how to avoid getting shot when they go out in public.

https://hartmannreport.com/p/is-the-plague-of-guns-a-racist-fever

https://www.kff.org/other/poll-finding/americans-experiences-with-gun-related-violence-injuries-and-deaths/

Jake from State Farm wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

https://hartmannreport.com/p/is-the-plague-of-guns-a-racist-fever

https://www.kff.org/other/poll-finding/americans-experiences-with-gun-related-violence-injuries-and-deaths/

The wife was worried the other day about a shooter when we took the granddaughter to the easter egg hunt at the Capitol, so yeah, the 84% doesn't surprise me. I'm more happy go lucky so I don't always think about it.

Good article from Hartmann about the roots of the NRA growing from and embedded in crime and racism, that doesn't surprise me either. A modern day KKK is what they really are, hiding behind the American flag and the 2nd amendment.

TravelinMan wrote:

Jake from State Farm wrote:

The wife was worried the other day about a shooter when we took the granddaughter to the easter egg hunt at the Capitol, so yeah, the 84% doesn't surprise me. I'm more happy go lucky so I don't always think about it.

Good article from Hartmann about the roots of the NRA growing from and embedded in crime and racism, that doesn't surprise me either. A modern day KKK is what they really are, hiding behind the American flag and the 2nd amendment.

I do think that if we want to eliminate guns, the left should form an organization that pushes 2A rights for minorities, immigrants, and LBGTQ persons. We'll have gun restrictions faster than you can blink.

Floyd Robertson wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

I do think that if we want to eliminate guns, the left should form an organization that pushes 2A rights for minorities, immigrants, and LBGTQ persons. We'll have gun restrictions faster than you can blink.

IDK, maybe Charlie Kirk would even think some RW gun deaths are worth it.

[tw]1644809235048308738[/tw]

Trapper Gus wrote:https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2023/03/27/nashville-shooting-covenant-school-blame-guns/11550808002/

The author's feeling mirrors mine, which I expressed in forcible terms on TOB the night of the MSU shooting (it sucks to have to call it that) and was given a 2-week ban, the second ban in 25 years of posting over there, justified by that board's standards, but it was well worth it to me.

Floyd Robertson wrote:[tw]1641131375087566867[/tw]

in interviews with 10 pistol owners here in Michigan’s gun belt, the measures are met with surprisingly little resistance, and in some cases, support. Mass shootings at Oxford High School and Michigan State University convinced some that gun reforms are worth a shot. And they say they worry about gun violence, too  — it’s why they try to protect themselves with guns of their own.

“I have mixed feelings,” said Comoford, a lifelong resident of Montmorency. “I don’t know if it (the gun measures) will do what they think it will. We all think something more needs to be done. We just don’t know what.”

1. Do anything and find out if works.
2. Ban the effing ARs like Clinton did.

bridgem wrote:Back at Redwood Steak House, Comoford said she’s fine with politicians’ attempts to stop the next Oxford or MSU shooting, or the thousands of less-publicized gun crimes committed in Michigan every year. Until she sees proof those efforts work, though, she’ll keep her 9 mm in her purse.

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2023/03/27/nashville-shooting-covenant-school-blame-guns/11550808002/

The author's feeling mirrors mine, which I expressed in forcible terms on TOB the night of the MSU shooting (it sucks to have to call it that) and was given a 2-week ban, the second ban in 25 years of posting over there, justified by that board's standards, but it was well worth it to me.

I read your post that did it. I don't remember what you said anymore but i distinctly remember thinking that you were definitely going to get banned for it. So i'm guessing it was pretty blatant.

It's something you might find inside James Bond's Aston Martin: A gun that only lets a specific person use it.

It's what Biofire Technologies, a company based in Broomfield, Colorado, on Thursday said it created, launching the world's first biometric handgun, The Biofire Smart Gun, according to a company statement.

Ralph Yarl, a 16-year-old in Kansas City, was shot when he knocked on the wrong door while looking for his twin siblings. Twenty-year-old Kaylin Gillis was shot and killed when the car she was in turned into the wrong driveway while looking for a friend. Two cheerleaders—Payton Washington, 18, and Heather Roth, 21—were shot when one of them accidentally opened the wrong door in a parking lot. Six-year-old Kinsley White, her father, and the father of a friend were shot after children went into a neighbor’s yard to retrieve a basketball that had rolled away.

All of these incidents happened in a week. In that same week, five people died and 32 others were injured in a shooting rampage at a Sweet 16 birthday party. Four men were shot when someone took offense to their painting over graffiti outside an ice cream shop. Four more were shot when an argument got heated on a residential street corner. And those are only a selection of the 14 mass shootings—those in which four or more people were wounded or killed—over that seven-day period.

The aphorism “an armed society is a polite society” is a frequently used saying among gun supporters on the right. It’s also been featured on banners, buttons, and T-shirts from the National Rifle Association. But no one ever seems to ask what it really means.

This is what it means. All of this. It means in a society with more guns than people, even the slightest provocation ends with someone getting shot.

"An armed society is a polite society, we do not have enough things to kill off the weak and the stupid these days, but to stay alive as an armed citizen a man has to be either quick with his wits or with his hands, preferably both"
“Beyond This Horizon.” by Robert Heinlein

The Second Amendment to the Constitution, on which modern-day arguments for widespread gun ownership rest, is one simple sentence: “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” There’s not a lot to go on about what the Framers meant, although in their day, to “bear arms” meant to be part of an organized militia.

After the Brady Bill passed in 1993, the NRA paid for lawsuits in nine states to strike it down. Until 1959, every single legal article on the Second Amendment concluded that it was not intended to guarantee individuals the right to own a gun. But in the 1970s, legal scholars funded by the NRA had begun to argue that the Second Amendment did exactly that.

Trapper Gus wrote:https://apnews.com/article/assault-guns-age-bill-shootings-texas-30503eb6237b8c2126a4763082aa559f?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=TopNews&utm_campaign=position_04

Ban Guns!

Jake from State Farm wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:https://apnews.com/article/assault-guns-age-bill-shootings-texas-30503eb6237b8c2126a4763082aa559f?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=TopNews&utm_campaign=position_04

Ban Guns!

I've been thinking about selling some of the guns I own but worry about the wrong type of people ending up with them. Maybe a tax credit for turning them in to be destroyed would help to keep them out of the wrong hands?

Trapper Gus wrote:

Jake from State Farm wrote:

I've been thinking about selling some of the guns I own but worry about the wrong type of people ending up with them. Maybe a tax credit for turning them in to be destroyed would help to keep them out of the wrong hands?

Whatever works. Just Ban Guns.

Jake from State Farm wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Whatever works. Just Ban Guns.

We both know that isn't going to happen. 8 people shot in Texas and the repubs in charge threaten to throw a democratic legislator out of the building if he brings up gun control again.

BELGRADE, Serbia (AP) — Serbian authorities on Sunday displayed many of around 13,500 weapons they say people have been handed over since this month’s mass shootings, including hand grenades, automatic weapons, and anti-tank rocket launchers.

The authorities have declared a one-month amnesty period for citizens to hand over unregistered weapons or face prison sentences as part of a crackdown on guns following the two mass shootings that left 17 people dead, many of them children.

...

“After June 8, the state will respond with repressive measures and punishments will be very strict,” he said of the post-amnesty period. “What does anyone need an automatic weapon for? Or all these guns?”

Serbia is estimated to be among the top countries in Europe in guns per capita. Many are left over from the wars of the 1990s and held illegally.

Other anti-gun measures are to include stricter controls of gun owners and shooting ranges.

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — Democratic Minnesota senators held firm despite only a one-vote majority Friday to pass gun control legislation strongly supported by the governor that would align the battleground state with others nationally that have taken steps to keep guns out of the hands of people in crisis and criminals.

The proposals include a “red flag law” that would allow authorities to ask courts for “extreme risk protection orders” to temporarily take guns away from people deemed to be an imminent threat to others or themselves. The provision is part of a broad public safety budget bill that also contains expanded background checks for gun transfers.

The bill passed 34-33 on a party-line vote late Friday after around nine hours of debate.

Gun violence has surged ahead of the opioid crisis as Americans' top public health concern, according to the latest edition of the Axios-Ipsos American Health Index.