What Number of "Mass Shootings" will Justify overruling of the 2nd Amendment?

[BULLDOG]

Since the civil war, how many times have Americans taken up arms against the government to protect their rights? Yes, I know there have been a couple cases when crazy nut jobs took over a bird sanctuary or similar things, but how many times have the public been at armed conflict with our government?

how many times have you used your fire ins on your house since youve had it???

Once, but it isn't an odd occurrence. Fire insurance is used several times every day. Did you have a point?

 

[Marion Morrison]

None... it's a blood sport in America.

Not true.
These mass shootings are usually lone, mentally disturbed, crazed madmen who are lashing out.

We used to put people like that in Mental Hospitals, but Big Pharma conned the government into thinking their pills can control teh crazy just as good as 4 walls and a padded cell.

Yeah, Mental Hospitals need to be reopened.

 

[night_son]

Every time some nut job Leftist goes out and shoots up a school, or gathering...the Left jump on the "Take Away The Guns" bandwagon screaming from their morally superior high ground that only they have the final solution.

They ALWAYS blame gun violence on THE GUN itself. Completely omitting the horrendous leftist policies that are creating a generation of savages.

While they scream about the lives lost, they couldn't care less about that. Their power lies in the control they gain over others by any means necessary and available.

Therefore, in their minds, civilians must be disarmed.

So how many "Mass shootings" are the magic number required to get it done? 2 per year? 1 pr month?

Here's my point.....THERE IS NO NUMBER THAT WILL EVER JUSTIFY IT.

The 2nd Amendment was never about Personal Safety....it is about National Safety. The ability of a population to resist government tyranny.

The price of freedom was never "Free". And the Cost of giving in to tyrants that want to disarm a population is higher than any number of isolated incidences of left leaning madmen who go on sporadic shooting sprees.

The very Day "good men" lose the fight to be armed, is the same day true tyranny will raise it's ugly head and devour them.

I mostly agree with you, however, the Second Amendment is absolutely about personal safety, community and national safety—which are all intertwined and so depend on each other in order to achieve and ensure our safety on any level imaginable. The radical American left will take our personal firearms if We The People let them. And, they damn well will celebrate the day they've left us unable to protect our families from "poor-victim" minorities and foreign mass murderers. You can take that to the bank.

 

[BULLDOG]

Every time some nut job Leftist goes out and shoots up a school, or gathering...the Left jump on the "Take Away The Guns" bandwagon screaming from their morally superior high ground that only they have the final solution.

They ALWAYS blame gun violence on THE GUN itself. Completely omitting the horrendous leftist policies that are creating a generation of savages.

While they scream about the lives lost, they couldn't care less about that. Their power lies in the control they gain over others by any means necessary and available.

Therefore, in their minds, civilians must be disarmed.

So how many "Mass shootings" are the magic number required to get it done? 2 per year? 1 pr month?

Here's my point.....THERE IS NO NUMBER THAT WILL EVER JUSTIFY IT.

The 2nd Amendment was never about Personal Safety....it is about National Safety. The ability of a population to resist government tyranny.

The price of freedom was never "Free". And the Cost of giving in to tyrants that want to disarm a population is higher than any number of isolated incidences of left leaning madmen who go on sporadic shooting sprees.

The very Day "good men" lose the fight to be armed, is the same day true tyranny will raise it's ugly head and devour them.

I mostly agree with you, however, the Second Amendment is absolutely about personal safety, community and national safety—which are all intertwined and so depend on each other in order to achieve and ensure our safety on any level imaginable. The radical American left will take our personal firearms if We The People let them. And, they damn well will celebrate the day they've left us unable to protect our families from "poor-victim" minorities and foreign mass murderers. You can take that to the bank.

I didn't know that's what I wanted. Are you sure that it wasn't that straw man that wanted to take your guns?

 

[progressive hunter]

Since the civil war, how many times have Americans taken up arms against the government to protect their rights? Yes, I know there have been a couple cases when crazy nut jobs took over a bird sanctuary or similar things, but how many times have the public been at armed conflict with our government?

how many times have you used your fire ins on your house since youve had it???

Once, but it isn't an odd occurrence. Fire insurance is used several times every day. Did you have a point?

and guns are used everyday to save lives from both criminals and government


better to have it and not need it than the other way around

 

[depotoo]

How many shootings will it take to ban violent shooter games and movies of gun toting monsters?.....You can't ban guns and leave them in movies and games....so why not try banning the violent movie and games first?....we had guns before shooter games but we didn't have mass shootings.....what has changed?....not guns...not gun ownership...the games have changed...movies have changed...kids have changed....

And the treatment of the mentally ill has changed.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

So you're wetting your pants and arming up for something that has never happened, and there is no reason to believe will ever happen. Typical gun nut.

Stop the crotch inspections, it's gay.
Do your homework and find out what happened in April of 1861
Read the Constitution at least once in your life. Then study history and find out what has happened to unarmed populations many times.
It has absolutely ZERO to do with being a "gun nut". But it does take some common sense to figure all that out.
And incredible idiocy to allow it to happen to yourself yet again in spite of histories warnings.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

I mostly agree with you, however, the Second Amendment is absolutely about personal safety, community and national safety—which are all intertwined and so depend on each other in order to achieve and ensure our safety on any level imaginable. The radical American left will take our personal firearms if We The People let them. And, they damn well will celebrate the day they've left us unable to protect our families from "poor-victim" minorities and foreign mass murderers. You can take that to the bank.

At the time the Constitution was written, the Primary focus was on preventing a relapse of American government into a tyrannical beast similar to what Great Britain was perceived as during those times. The taxation without representation pushed many over the line. The 2nd Amendment primarily addresses the concept of government tyranny.

That said, the Right To Bear Arms could also be construed to have a secondary meaning to extend to personal safety. But the Left largely likes to re-interpret that as meaning that only people in Government allowed Militias should have the right to "Bear" arms.
Imagine that....the Left wants THE GOVERNMENT to dictate who can bear arms. This is the antithesis of the intent of the 2nd Amendment.

And yes, regardless of any perfunctory implications, and all the propaganda, the ultimate goal is disarming the American people. The leftist stool pigeons at the bottom simply believe their lying leaders every deceptive word without question.

 

[22lcidw]

The politicians cause this with their decrees over the the last several decades. Somehow the 2nd amendment is at fault.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

The politicians cause this with their decrees over the the last several decades. Somehow the 2nd amendment is at fault.

Yes. because they will never take the blame for what they have done or allowed.

 

[BULLDOG]

So you're wetting your pants and arming up for something that has never happened, and there is no reason to believe will ever happen. Typical gun nut.

Stop the crotch inspections, it's gay.
Do your homework and find out what happened in April of 1861
Read the Constitution at least once in your life. Then study history and find out what has happened to unarmed populations many times.
It has absolutely ZERO to do with being a "gun nut". But it does take some common sense to figure all that out.
And incredible idiocy to allow it to happen to yourself yet again in spite of histories warnings.

Yes, I know about Fort Sumpter where the gun nuts of the day attacked a government fort and started the civil war. That didn't work out too well for them even in those times. What do you think a bunch of idiot gun nuts with rifles would be able to do against today's military? You're a childish idiot wanting to play army. I'm not against taking people's guns except in cases like yours where you should have yours replaced with paint ball guns so you could play army all you want.

 

[Marion Morrison]

 

[BULLDOG]

Do you really believe someone will try to take your and my guns, or are you just repeating silly crap?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Every time some nut job Leftist goes out and shoots up a school, or gathering...the Left jump on the "Take Away The Guns" bandwagon screaming from their morally superior high ground that only they have the final solution.

They ALWAYS blame gun violence on THE GUN itself. Completely omitting the horrendous leftist policies that are creating a generation of savages.

While they scream about the lives lost, they couldn't care less about that. Their power lies in the control they gain over others by any means necessary and available.

Therefore, in their minds, civilians must be disarmed.

So how many "Mass shootings" are the magic number required to get it done? 2 per year? 1 pr month?

Here's my point.....THERE IS NO NUMBER THAT WILL EVER JUSTIFY IT.

The 2nd Amendment was never about Personal Safety....it is about National Safety. The ability of a population to resist government tyranny.

The price of freedom was never "Free". And the Cost of giving in to tyrants that want to disarm a population is higher than any number of isolated incidences of left leaning madmen who go on sporadic shooting sprees.

The very Day "good men" lose the fight to be armed, is the same day true tyranny will raise it's ugly head and devour them.

This subject pops up every time there is a mass shooting and every time I remind people that we could end over 90 percent of all mass shootings without gun control. And then people ask for the answer - and I give it. But, it don't fit on a bumper sticker nor will fit into a Tweet. So, as Winston Churchill once observed:

“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.”

 

[Porter Rockwell]

None... it's a blood sport in America.

Not true.
These mass shootings are usually lone, mentally disturbed, crazed madmen who are lashing out.

Not quite true. There are a finite number of markers, and when mixed, with a common ingredient, there is a near 100 percent chance that the individual will commit an act of physical violence in their life time.

Mass shooters are of two varieties:

The political jihadist (who is a bit difficult to profile)

Those who fit a certain profile with a finite number of markers that CAN be identified and dealt with before they commit an illegal act. The solution is a civil intervention and does not involved any contact with criminal actions.

 

[PredFan]

As long as we continue to focus on the tool used and not on the offender, there will be no stopping these people.

If anything, the 2A can stop at least some of it, but they always happen where guns are prohibited.

How much faster would armed citizens have stopped that INCEL thug in Gilroy than the cops? Last time there was a group of armed citizens at a shooting, in Dallas, they all ran screaming like little girls.

First of all, it wouldn't have happened. They never want to do these shootings in places where guns are allowed, and 2nd, even armed people will run and even cry out when surprised like that, but one armed person would have stopped the shooter faster.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Yes, I know about Fort Sumpter where the gun nuts of the day attacked a government fort and started the civil war. That didn't work out too well for them even in those times. What do you think a bunch of idiot gun nuts with rifles would be able to do against today's military? You're a childish idiot wanting to play army. I'm not against taking people's guns except in cases like yours where you should have yours replaced with paint ball guns so you could play army all you want.

You completely missed the point....
You said "It has never happened"....you were wrong.

In fact, you're so wrong across the board you don't even realize the fool you're making of yourself.

I think thinking men would agree the Founding Fathers were several grades above you in IQ. They provided for the right to bear arms. "Gun Nuts" to you, while you sit here in the nation they formed enjoying the framework for freedom THEY gave you, so you can diss and disrespect all the sacrifices made so that you can mock them.

Do you have a pistol? That would make you a "gun nut" too btw.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Not quite true. There are a finite number of markers, and when mixed, with a common ingredient, there is a near 100 percent chance that the individual will commit an act of physical violence in their life time.

Mass shooters are of two varieties:

The political jihadist (who is a bit difficult to profile)

Those who fit a certain profile with a finite number of markers that CAN be identified and dealt with before they commit an illegal act. The solution is a civil intervention and does not involved any contact with criminal actions.

I specifically said "These mass shootings are USUALLY carried out by lone, mentally disturbed, crazed madmen lashing out"
Please review the list of US "Mass Shootings". You will find I am correct.

Those who fit a certain profile with a finite number of markers that CAN be identified and dealt with before they commit an illegal act. The solution is a civil intervention and does not involved any contact with criminal actions.

So who do you give this power to? And who gets to determine those markers? Could being a Trump Supporter be one of the markers? Most on the Left would say "absolutely".

What happens if someone fits too many of those "markers"? Are their guns then automatically confiscated even before they commit any crime? (That would sure please the radical left!). What happens when radical Leftists gain control of the WH and Congress and decide to manipulate those markers so that ALL Gun Owners are considered "dangerous"?

While all are tragedies, the small number of "mass shootings" and the infinitely small number of lives lost vs the total population is probably not worth giving additional powers to government that could be abused. Every time you hand over powers to the government, you open an new can of worms that can be abused.

While the intent is good, and it might even stop a mass shooting occasionally, there is a definite danger to freedom also associated with handing the government the power to limit our Constitutional Rights by profiling. And like taxation, once a precedent is set, it's all too easy to be extended like the tentacles of an octopus.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Not quite true. There are a finite number of markers, and when mixed, with a common ingredient, there is a near 100 percent chance that the individual will commit an act of physical violence in their life time.

Mass shooters are of two varieties:

The political jihadist (who is a bit difficult to profile)

Those who fit a certain profile with a finite number of markers that CAN be identified and dealt with before they commit an illegal act. The solution is a civil intervention and does not involved any contact with criminal actions.

I specifically said "These mass shootings are USUALLY carried out by lone, mentally disturbed, crazed madmen lashing out"
Please review the list of US "Mass Shootings". You will find I am correct.

Those who fit a certain profile with a finite number of markers that CAN be identified and dealt with before they commit an illegal act. The solution is a civil intervention and does not involved any contact with criminal actions.

So who do you give this power to? And who gets to determine those markers? Could being a Trump Supporter be one of the markers? Most on the Left would say "absolutely".

What happens if someone fits too many of those "markers"? Are their guns then automatically confiscated even before they commit any crime? (That would sure please the radical left!). What happens when radical Leftists gain control of the WH and Congress and decide to manipulate those markers so that ALL Gun Owners are considered "dangerous"?

While all are tragedies, the small number of "mass shootings" and the infinitely small number of lives lost vs the total population is probably not worth giving additional powers to government that could be abused. Every time you hand over powers to the government, you open an new can of worms that can be abused.

While the intent is good, and it might even stop a mass shooting occasionally, there is a definite danger to freedom also associated with handing the government the power to limit our Constitutional Rights by profiling. And like taxation, once a precedent is set, it's all too easy to be extended like the tentacles of an octopus.

1) We already know the markers and they happen when a person is still a minor

2) The "power" is given to the people it's already in the hands of: LEOs and social workers. We're just going to make sure that these people are specifically trained to get results, not simply shuffle paperwork

3) The identifying markers are already known so we just have to use them

4) NOBODY'S guns are automatically taken. Fact is, under the plan, I cannot foresee anyone losing their firearms. They might divest themselves of them (at least temporarily) of their own free will and volition, but the government don't have the authority to take weapons

5) There is no way to manipulate fixed markers

6) The markers are not partisan. For example, a person does certain drugs or they do not and one marker is NOT sufficient for a civil intervention, NOT an attempt to take anyone's firearms

7) There is NO provision to confiscate any weapon at any time

And, so you didn't ask, but made silly assumptions:

The plan I drew up starting many years ago, does not increase the size, power, or scope of government; it does not create any new bureaucracies; it will not cost taxpayers any additional money.... fact is, it would SAVE tax dollars. What it actually does is require the system to use the information they already collect and prevent youth from becoming criminals. The worse thing the plans does is to actually require social workers to earn their money since they are the first to come into contact with troubled families. It would require specially trained officers to investigate and to actually help people. It would require the system to revise their methods of thinking.

An overwhelming majority of mass shooters (save of political jihadists) are created by our own culture. You'd be amazed at how many people we could help IF the government did the job we pay them to do. We simply have to show them the blueprint and teach them how.

 

[OldLady]

None... it's a blood sport in America.

Not true.
These mass shootings are usually lone, mentally disturbed, crazed madmen who are lashing out.

We used to put people like that in Mental Hospitals, but Big Pharma conned the government into thinking their pills can control teh crazy just as good as 4 walls and a padded cell.

Yeah, Mental Hospitals need to be reopened.

Well, the pills work but crazy people won't take them once they're "free." What we need, instead of mental hospitals, is long-term injections, like the 3 month birth control shot, and a law that if they don't show up for their shots, they get hunted down with the butterfly net and locked back in the mental hospital.