Started By
Message

re: If were going to talk about "mass shootings", then context is important.

Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:46 pm to
Posted by Clames
Member since Oct 2010
16635 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:46 pm to
CNN does no such thing.

Let me help you out since it appears you aren't actually going to post any useful, objective information about this topic.

FBI Report: Active Shooter Incidents in the US in 2018

FBI: Active Shooter Incidents in the US in 2016 - 2017

FBI Study of Pre-Attack Behaviors of Active Shooters from 2000 - 2013

FBI: School Shooter: Threat Assessment Perspective

Mass Victimization: Promising Avenues for Prevention

Maybe you and others will take a few hours to read these and then you can begin to understand how enormously complex the phenomena is.
Posted by DeafJam73
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18513 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:46 pm to
Getting off subject. You can throw all the numbers you want. The truth is, laws don’t stop violence. Period. It provides a legal consequence, not a deterrant. Taking away people’s means to defend themselves, leaves them exposed to bad elements.
Posted by helluvaday
Member since Jun 2018
443 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:46 pm to
I guess we lead different lives. I don't worry about gang bangers and "bad guys" coming to my house. If they do, we have 3 shotguns at our disposal for protection. If you want an AK-47 because you're afraid Jose from MS13 is gonna barge through your door, perhaps you should consider moving.
Posted by Dead End
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2013
21237 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:47 pm to
quote:

Suicide by gunfire is gun violence.



Have you ever seen a suicide, ever worked a suicide? Guns, blades, ropes, or ODs equal the same end results.
Including suicides is a way to bump up the numbers.
Posted by Geauxtiga
No man's land
Member since Jan 2008
34377 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:49 pm to
quote:

. If you want an AK-47 because you're afraid Jose from MS13 is gonna barge through your door, perhaps you should consider moving.
What if I want it for hunting deer and pigs? I, and many of my friends, DO use AR rifles (different calibers) for that purpose.Especially pigs since there is no limit when you run up on a big sounder of them.
Posted by DeafJam73
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18513 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:50 pm to
quote:

I guess we lead different lives. I don't worry about gang bangers and "bad guys" coming to my house. If they do, we have 3 shotguns at our disposal for protection. If you want an AK-47 because you're afraid Jose from MS13 is gonna barge through your door, perhaps you should consider moving.


You’re not even making a valid point as to why I have to surrender mine. Just because you don’t have a need for one? Okay, great. Liberty is a two way street. I have the right to own one the same way you have a right to not own one if those are our choices.
Posted by Dead End
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2013
21237 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:51 pm to
quote:


I guess we lead different lives. I don't worry about gang bangers and "bad guys" coming to my house. If they do, we have 3 shotguns at our disposal for protection. If you want an AK-47 because you're afraid Jose from MS13 is gonna barge through your door, perhaps you should consider moving.


Do you think everyone has the money to move? Just because you aren't comfortable with a particular rifle, it doesn't mean his rights should be limited by your feelings.
Posted by Clames
Member since Oct 2010
16635 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:52 pm to
quote:

join a
Militia


10 USC 311:

quote:

§311 . Militia: composition and classes (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia are-

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.


Also from v. Heller 2008:

quote:

The Supreme Court held:[47]
(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53. (a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22. (b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28. (c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment. Pp. 28–30. (d) The Second Amendment’s drafting history, while of dubious interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms. Pp. 30–32. (e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47. (f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.



Bolded so the resident mouth breather can understand easier.
Posted by helluvaday
Member since Jun 2018
443 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:54 pm to
What if? What if? What ifs are abundant. You can still hunt pigs without an AR. Your ability to hunt is not gone because your preferred weapon is no longer available to purchase.

I'm not anti-gun. As mentioned, we own 3 in our household. I just don't think the guns mentioned here are necessary to own.
Posted by fallguy_1978
Best States #50
Member since Feb 2018
48760 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:56 pm to
quote:

I'm not anti-gun. As mentioned, we own 3 in our household. I just don't think the guns mentioned here are necessary to own.

None are necessary to own. Maybe we can outlaw my pocket knife like the Brits too.
Posted by DeafJam73
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18513 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:57 pm to
So? Are you saying that those types of weapons should be illegal because you don’t think they’re necessary? We all own many things that aren’t necessary.
Posted by go ta hell ole miss
Member since Jan 2007
13661 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:57 pm to
Trump has already shown he does not care about the 2nd Amendment or Constitution with the violation of the Takings Clause without just compensation and retroactive ban on bump stocks. ARs are next and will be banned without compensation based on improper interpretation of a law from the 1930s. Turn them in or you are a felon. It’s coming, especially if the next president is a Democrat, but likely even under President Trump based on his unconstitutional precedent. Even Presidents Clinton and Obama were not that egregious in violations of the Second Amendment.
Posted by DeafJam73
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18513 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:58 pm to
quote:


None are necessary to own. Maybe we can outlaw my pocket knife like the Brits too.




Aren’t the British experiencing a record number of stabbings?
Posted by DeafJam73
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18513 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 4:59 pm to
Trump won’t pass a ban. That is a certified way to lose reelection.
Posted by Dead End
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2013
21237 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 5:00 pm to
quote:



Aren’t the British experiencing a record number of stabbings?


Yes.

Hopefully, they ban stabbings next. That'll solve the problem.
Posted by fallguy_1978
Best States #50
Member since Feb 2018
48760 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 5:00 pm to
quote:

Aren’t the British experiencing a record number of stabbings?

Yeah, my Benchmade in my pocket right now is a felony there. To be fair, violent crime is lower in England and it absolutely will be in a countries that don't have weapons access. I'm willing to live with it too.
Posted by DeafJam73
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18513 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 5:03 pm to
And violent crime as a whole has gone down in the US as well. It doesn’t seem that way because 24 hour news coverage sensationalizes everything non-stop.
Posted by andwesway
Zachary, LA
Member since Jun 2016
1522 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 5:07 pm to
Notice the uptick since social media became a prominent part of our lives.
Posted by BeerThirty
Red Stick
Member since May 2017
903 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 5:08 pm to
Cars aren’t necessary either, yet they kill more people than guns do every year in the US. That’s including suicide as well. You have multiple options to travel, so you need to get rid of your motor vehicles. You’re obviously a part of the problem if you’re still driving around.
Posted by andwesway
Zachary, LA
Member since Jun 2016
1522 posts
Posted on 8/4/19 at 5:09 pm to
(no message)
This post was edited on 8/4/19 at 5:10 pm
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram