Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I am not sure what explains it. What I've said here is that the notion that amending or eliminating the Second Amendment is going to solve the problem is defective, and we have plenty of evidence which supports that conclusion.While I realize correlation is not causation, I can't help but remember that we in the US watch DAILY as mass shootings happen. These things happen almost nowhere else on earth with the frequency they happen here. Why do you suppose that is?
What you are saying, Albion, is that "guns" aren't the problem, people are. And so it stands to reason that if almost every other civilized country has far fewer murders and "guns" aren't the problem, then the problem is that the American people are, by default, more violent and homicidal than people in other countries. And if that is the case, then a lot of them should not be owning the means to kill.
I am not sure what explains it.
What I've said here is that the notion that amending or eliminating the Second Amendment is going to solve the problem is defective, and we have plenty of evidence which supports that conclusion.
That doesn't follow logically. The meat axe approach almost always misses the real point, and that's what banking on the "easy answer" as the sure-fire solution to this particular problem amounts to.
Look at the VDCL rallies in Virginia, thousands of people walking around with assault rifles, no one shot, cops dont bat an eye. There's much more to dig into before answering the OP question.
When I lived in St. Louis County in the 1990's, St. Louis City had gun buyback programs. They were also very concerned because the hospitals had so many gunshot victims who required very expensive medical care and who were uninsured.
While obviously our country needs national health insurance, perhaps in the form of Medicare for All, we all know that hospitals who provide a lot of uncompensated care go out of business. It would certainly be fair to tax ammunition for the purpose of covering uncompensated medical expenses for victims of gun violence. It would be hard to say that bullets didn't hurt people...
Of the four states I lived in, Missouri, St. Louis County, was my very favorite. It breaks my heart to see how that state has moved so far to the right. I remember right before we moved holding a sign at the polls to vote down a referendum for conceal carry--and, thanks to the suburbs of St. Louis and KC, it failed. What happened to all those sensible people? Where did they go? (Well, we had to move, but surely most of them are still there.)
If a police officer can justify shooting or killing someone because "they had a gun", did that person really have the right to bear arms?
I am 61 years old. I have carried both concealed and open carry since 1983. I've shot no one, I have pulled the weapon two times, once in defense of myself and once to stop an active rape. I have walked past officers in restaurants, on the street etc and never one time been stopped. (and I am not white).
Want to know why?
I don't break the law. That's why.
An utter mystery that no one can explain.
I didn't say that either. But the proposal to ban guns as if doing that will solve the problem is wishful thinking at best. That's the message.
On Thanksgiving night, the sounds of gunshots inside an Alabama mall sent shoppers diving for cover and sprinting for exits. Outside the mall, Emantic Fitzgerald Bradford Jr. pulled out a gun and rushed to protect shoppers, his family said.
But Mr. Bradford was soon dead. An off-duty police officer working security at the mall, Riverchase Galleria in Hoover, Ala., fatally shot him, the authorities said. In the days that followed, the official account by the Hoover Police Department of what happened inside and outside the mall has shifted drastically.
At first, the officer was praised for stopping a gunman after two people were shot outside a Footaction store on the second floor. Then the police said that Mr. Bradford was not in fact the gunman and that the true gunman remained on the loose.
Chicago was only a quick example. Many more could have been cited. And as for comparing the US with every other nation on Earth, I thought that we already got past that mistake.Your position appears to be that since restricted gun laws in Chicago don't work that we are OK ignoring how restrictive gun laws have worked in almost every single developed nation on earth.
That is great for you. Tamir Rice and Philandro Castile had a somewhat different experience from you.
Chicago was only a quick example. Many more could have been cited. And as for comparing the US with every other nation on Earth, I thought that we already got past that mistake.
We cannot just say that X works in Country Y, so if we do the same thing, the outcome is assured.
Tamir Rice:
According to the release, federal prosecutors with both the Civil Rights Division and the US Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Ohio concluded that they could not prove that Rice's constitutional rights were violated or the officers obstructed justice.You are correct - I have never made a motion like going for my weapon. He did and that is why the officer was not charged legally nor civilly. your point fails
"In order to establish a federal civil rights violation, the government would have to prove that Officer Loehmann's actions were unreasonable under the circumstances, and that his actions were willful," federal attorneys said. " ... an officer is permitted to use deadly force where he reasonably believes that the suspect posed an imminent threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others. "
Prosecutors said that because the officers' stated that Loehmann thought Rice was going for a gun, the Justice Department would have to prove that "1) Tamir was not reaching for his gun; and 2) that Officer Loehmann did not perceive that Tamir was reaching for his gun, despite his consistent statements to the contrary."
As for Philandra Castile, after reviewing the dashcam video and other evidence, the officer was acquitted of all charges and never sued civilly. So my response is the same as above.Personal Example: When I pulled my weapon on the rapist and held him, police came and I immediately holstered my weapon and put my hands up. They knocked me on the ground and sat un me, hand cuffing me after taking my side arm. That is what they are trained to do - no harm, no foul. When all the yelling and screaming stopped, we talked. Guess what?! Three out of the four officers where white. (Gasp!). Other than muddy clothes I suffered no physical injury and the officers actually thanked me. And I am not white! Go figure.
Do police have that right? To shoot someone merely because a gun is found on the person or the seat of his car? I don't think so.
The point of our justice system is not to wait till the first shot rings out and then act. You don't protect people that way!
Do you think police are patting themselves on the back and saying, "Good day. Only one murdered, and we managed to protect the demonstrators' second amendment rights." Really?
I have written about a nearby in the wake of the Parkland massacre. Fortunately, I was demonstrating in a different city--but 80 miles to the north of me, some of the militia from Harrison and Russellville got up into trees with sniper rifles to surveil the ANTI-gun rally. At considerable expense, the city had to send out helicopters and drones to check out the action in the trees--by people who belonged to groups that have been identified with domestic terrorism.
Is that what we as a society want to spend our money on, helicopters and drones? The second amendment has gone too far.
Have you ever noticed that the death of Philando Castile is defended as being okay, citing the officer acquittal. Yet when it comes to Derek Chauvin, they're all up in arms about it being an injustice. It seems pretty clear that it's all about supporting police officers regardless of the case.Yet Philandro Castile is dead. He clearly stated to the police that he had a registered weapon that he was licensed to have and he was gunned down.
And no one went to jail for doing so.
ERGO: Philandro Castile who didn't wave his gun or threaten anyone was killed for gun possession.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?