Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Las Vegas Oct 2017 mass shooting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JCT View Post
    But only in the movies can someone kill 17 people with their bare hands in 6 minutes. Large capacity, auto-loading weapons let any nut job have the chance to turn into Arnold. I think that we as a society have lost the privilege of owning this type weapon until we can fix the reasons behind these atrocities - which may never happen in a country as large and diverse as ours.
    As 1997 North Hollywood showed, it won't make a dent unless you start confiscating firearms and that crosses so many other Constitutional Rights that I don't even want to think about it.

    And there is the legal arguement that 99.99% of all firearm owners are law abiding citizens. Is it Constitutional to punish the majority for the crimes of a minority?

    There is a solution to mass school shootings. Fortify the schools. Fences and surveillance cameras to be monitored by the local police who will have a nearby RRF. Police presence is required for school in and school out but not for the whole day. During the school day, entry and exits are to be controlled via single doors and the police can see who uses other doors and enact procedures if they see something wrong, ie order a lock down to the classrooms.

    But here too, we cross into Constitutional Rights issues, namely the 4A. For this to be effective, the police would need to see everywhere, including the washrooms. Not necessary the toilets and urinals but who's in the room. The need to know where the shooter is would be a vital tactical intel.

    Also, GS, we have to include gang related violence. These are the kids who are of school age with access to high capacity and at times, fully auto firearms.
    Chimo

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JCT View Post
      But only in the movies can someone kill 17 people with their bare hands in 6 minutes. Large capacity, auto-loading weapons let any nut job have the chance to turn into Arnold. I think that we as a society have lost the privilege of owning this type weapon until we can fix the reasons behind these atrocities - which may never happen in a country as large and diverse as ours.
      Interesting.Auto-loading weapons are basically all modern weapons.Lever action,pump action and revolvers are not technically auto-loading,but they are almost the same in effect.In effect you believe you have lost your ''privilege'' to all firearms that involve mid-late 19th century technology.
      First,I am unfortunate enough to have that ''privilege''.I happen to be an officer and certified firearms instructor in a country that does not recognizes the fundamental right of the human being to protect his/her life.To own firearms requires going through a bureaucratic craphole.You as American don't have that privilege,you have a RIGHT,not something given or taken by the state at its whim.

      Second,pardon the brutality,but why so emotional about 17 people?It's bad,nobody desires that,but don't tell me you have nightmares about people you don't know.It is a tragedy that triggers emotions when it involves people one knows.
      You want to reduce death rates?Noble policy.Good for the society.But how about using reason and start with more lethal things?You reduce 1% cancer deaths,you save tens times more lives than are killed by rifles.Convince 1 % of junkies to quit,you get the same result.But,like Gunny said,you don't want that,you don't want to see AR's being used in school shootings.That is a subjective&emotional issue. You can also do that.Very easy and good for your emotions:don't watch TV.

      The reason behind the atrocities is rather simple.It is the 15 minutes of fame these losers get,plus the months of BS they cause.You also happen to remember these imbeciles.Each time you debate in public about guns,you hear about Columbine,Virginia Tech or sandy Hook and you encourage another loser to try it.Want to do something useful to the society?Again,stop watching TV.

      But your side,instead wants to infringe the rights and property of tens of millions.
      I cannot really understand how your side can be so absurd and not realistic.Do you understand that for their owners the guns are not just black pieces of steel,wood and plastic?That they are just one more thing that divides your complex country.
      Why on Earth are you dividing your country even more is beyond me.
      Those who know don't speak
      He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

      Comment


      • But only in the movies can someone kill 17 people with their bare hands in 6 minutes. Large capacity, auto-loading weapons let any nut job have the chance to turn into Arnold. I think that we as a society have lost the privilege of owning this type weapon until we can fix the reasons behind these atrocities - which may never happen in a country as large and diverse as ours.
        It's not a privilege, I haven't lost my rights, and I don't plan on giving mine up to people trying to play on the heart strings and to evil Russia to limit my rights.
        To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

        Comment


        • Why can't I drive a NASCAR up I-5? There are limits to everything, even to the rights granted us by the US Constitution. The Supreme Court has consistently upheld that these rights can be limited in certain ways. Why can the average citizen not own a full auto M-16/AR-15? What is the degree of difference between a full-auto AR-15, one equipped with a bumb-stock, and a semi-auto AR-15 with a large capacity magazine? Not much, a mod to the sear spring if I recall properly.

          I don't care how we reduce the number of shootings, but want to see results? Without getting into individual mental states/capacities/etc, what do we need to do to get to our goal? What enables someone to shoot a dozen people in a few minutes?

          Weapon capable of rapid fire, whether auto/semi-auto, etc
          Large, easily reloadable magazine
          Easy access to ammunition

          Remove one and it becomes more difficult to kill so many people in such a short time. So keep your AR-15 and others of its type (I would really love to have one, but at this time my resources are going elsewhere), but limit magazines to 5 rounds. Confiscate all others-exceptions to LE only. $10k+ fines for possession, jail, plus loss of all weapons/magazines/ammo that you own and loss of the right to buy more. That'd scare me into giving mine up. A quick check - magazines should not be longer than 3 inches-ish (make long enough for the weapon to function properly, but remove & replace should be slow.) Will this fly with the NRA, Congress, or the average man on the street. No. But something needs to be done before the Liberals find a casus belli to make all firearms illegal. Make no mistake, that is their ultimate goal. Everyone's opinions are so rigid, people need to remember to compromise so that progress is made. If not, one day they will all be gone.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by JCT View Post
            Why can't I drive a NASCAR up I-5?
            That is not a Constitutional Right.

            Originally posted by JCT View Post
            I don't care how we reduce the number of shootings, but want to see results? Without getting into individual mental states/capacities/etc, what do we need to do to get to our goal? What enables someone to shoot a dozen people in a few minutes?
            I don't think you can stop it. The North Hollywood Shootout had keroseen bombs in their car. And 11 September happenned. Boston Marathon made use of black powder.

            Originally posted by JCT View Post
            Remove one and it becomes more difficult to kill so many people in such a short time. So keep your AR-15 and others of its type (I would really love to have one, but at this time my resources are going elsewhere), but limit magazines to 5 rounds. Confiscate all others-exceptions to LE only. $10k+ fines for possession, jail, plus loss of all weapons/magazines/ammo that you own and loss of the right to buy more.
            And this crosses right into the 5A territory. You cannot confiscate legal private property without compensation. Again, only 3 bump stocks/trigger activators were surrendered in Mass.

            There are no easy answer and anyone who say so is fooling themselves. Cameras and Rapid Police Response crosses into 4A issues and turn schools into police states. I don't know how parents would feel having their children's privacy invaded and considering schools are responsible for their students' information and must have official sanction to release them to the police.

            I'm not saying to Americans should not have more controls. What I am saying is that either your Consitution is worth something or it is not. If it is worth something, then there should be no easy way out and go through the pains and processes of changing it. There should be no easy way to reduce Consitutional Rights. Go through the entire process of adding a Constitutional Admenment. If one side or the other is unwilling, then it's just dictatorship.
            Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 28 Feb 18,, 17:52.
            Chimo

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
              Lt. Governor of Georgia, Casey Cagle: I will kill any tax legislation that benefits @Delta unless the company changes its position and fully reinstates its relationship with @NRA. Corporations cannot attack conservatives and expect us not to fight back.

              https://twitter.com/CaseyCagle/statu...99605803454465
              Curious if anyone has any thoughts on this.

              Delta seems to be exercising their 1st Amendment rights with regards to free association and free speech. Lt. Gov Cagle of Georgia steps in and threatens to use government power to retaliate against Delta through tax break legislation if Delta doesn't re-associate itself with the NRA.
              "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

              Comment


              • lol so much for that conservative line about free markets and no government interference, eh.
                There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
                  Curious if anyone has any thoughts on this.

                  Delta seems to be exercising their 1st Amendment rights with regards to free association and free speech. Lt. Gov Cagle of Georgia steps in and threatens to use government power to retaliate against Delta through tax break legislation if Delta doesn't re-associate itself with the NRA.
                  Free speech doesn't guarantee you tax breaks. Since this is a Delta specific tax break given at the discretion of the state legislature it might be quite hard for Delta to contend that its first amendment right has been violated.

                  Comment


                  • yeah, it's legally viable.

                    but it's pretty freaking stupid to specifically target a company like this; for instance, Amazon has Atlanta on their list for HQ2, but how much you want to bet that this little stunt will cause Bezos to go "uh, how about no"?
                    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                    Comment


                    • This opinion from a writer over at RedState sums up my view nicely:

                      I’ll leave it to First Amendment experts as to whether this is an actual First Amendment violation. It certainly looks like viewpoint discrimination to me, but there could be technical arguments that it isn’t, as a legal matter. Companies are not entitled to tax breaks — especially targeted ones not generally available — and governments are able to accomplish many goals with tax policy that they could not otherwise accomplish. (That’s not necessarily a good thing, by the way; it’s just a description of the state of the law.)

                      But even if the Georgia legislature can do this legally, citizens should find it repulsive to this country’s principles when the government picks winners and losers based on private speech about a matter of public importance.

                      Imagine a scenario in which a blue state tells Hobby Lobby, for example, that their access to a tax break is dependent on whether the company publicly supports Planned Parenthood. Give Planned Parenthood employees and donors a special deal on your arts and crafts, and we’ll give you that tax break. Refuse to give them a deal, and no tax break for you! On what principled basis could you object to that, if you’re applauding Georgia’s threats to Delta here? Your only argument would be: Planned Parenthood bad, NRA good. And that’s not a principled argument. Any argument you could make that it’s wrong to use government for such purposes would lose all force, as people could easily point to your approval of Georgia’s actions here.
                      https://www.redstate.com/patterico/2...ld-tax-breaks/
                      "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                      Comment


                      • Roaring up the highway in a NASCAR? Sorry, not in the Constitution.
                        Multiple shots without reloading? Sorry, not in the Constitution.
                        Trust me?
                        I'm an economist!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by DOR View Post
                          Multiple shots without reloading? Sorry, not in the Constitution.
                          Of course it does. Unless you're arguing the US military should have only muskets.
                          Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 28 Feb 18,, 17:47.
                          Chimo

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
                            Of course it does. Unless you're arguing the US military should have only muskets.
                            Not really. The First and Second Amendments are pretty sparse in their language. Their language is actually quite powerful and almost beautiful. I'm definitely not a constitutional scholar and I'm sure that it's rare for so few words to generate so much debate.

                            Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
                            Nothing in there states I cannot slander someone, defame them, or shout 'Fire' in a crowded theater, but the courts have limited speech in these and other contexts. (I bleeding hate when a newsreader says the 'alleged' gunman when the guy was caught in the act.)

                            Similarly:
                            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.
                            People have been parsing these 27 words for decades and still argue over it. Nothing in the Second Amendment says I cannot own a machine gun. Yet the ATF says I cannot. The courts interpret the laws of the land in accordance with the Constitution and have found certain limitations to be constitutional. I have unfortunately come to the belief that the actions of a few have tainted the rights of us all.

                            As to confiscation of property, then pay for the magazines. $5 per 30 rnd magazine would do. People will scream about proper compensation or the cost of the program to buy back millions of magazines, but count the cost of this versus the what is inflicted. Local governments have confiscated private property through vague claims of eminent domain, and you almost never hear someone saying that they received fair compensation.

                            Sorry - a bit all over the place here.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by JCT View Post
                              Not really. The First and Second Amendments are pretty sparse in their language. Their language is actually quite powerful and almost beautiful. I'm definitely not a constitutional scholar and I'm sure that it's rare for so few words to generate so much debate.
                              David's exact words were "Multiple shots without reloading? Sorry, not in the Constitution."

                              I category state that "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" includes all the weaponry necessary for a military to defend the state. Whether the people have the right to these weapons is what's up for constitutional debate; not that these weapons were not defined.

                              Originally posted by JCT View Post
                              People have been parsing these 27 words for decades and still argue over it. Nothing in the Second Amendment says I cannot own a machine gun. Yet the ATF says I cannot. The courts interpret the laws of the land in accordance with the Constitution and have found certain limitations to be constitutional. I have unfortunately come to the belief that the actions of a few have tainted the rights of us all.

                              As to confiscation of property, then pay for the magazines. $5 per 30 rnd magazine would do. People will scream about proper compensation or the cost of the program to buy back millions of magazines, but count the cost of this versus the what is inflicted. Local governments have confiscated private property through vague claims of eminent domain, and you almost never hear someone saying that they received fair compensation.

                              Sorry - a bit all over the place here.
                              Well, I'm going to make you jump some more

                              A curiously scan of List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia even in the 2010s often do not include ARs nor AKs and more than a significant percentage were insecured pistols from home.

                              It would seemed irresponsible firearm ownership is more at play than high capacity mag availability.
                              Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 28 Feb 18,, 20:54.
                              Chimo

                              Comment


                              • I'll have to find it but an article I read a couple of days ago referenced a survey of some 1400 licences firearm owners in the US which stated that almost half those surveyed did not securely store their firearms in the home. No safes, no trigger locks, nothing.
                                If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X