Seven dead in Wisconsin Seikh temple shooting

[John Smith]

it is a lifetime appointment... meant to minimize political influence by removing political leverage

But does it? I'd also submit that in our history many people, including judges, hunted, and didn't want to interpret the 2nd Amendment in any way that would prohibit them from getting better hunting weapons. Then we go political forces like the NRA involved.

I suspect there exists more "politics" in our courts than we'd like to think. I would ask YOU to read my post with the quotes directly from the constitution and, based on that, tell me what I've got wrong.

[Meli]

sad that every shooting has to turn into a 2nd amendment thread.
How come you blokes never want to discuss WHY?

[Waddie]

John Smith; I notice that no matter how chastized I get for my opinion, that no one can use the words in the constitution to disprove my interpretation.

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms". Everywhere else in the Constitution that the phrase "the people" is used there is widespread agreement that it refers to individual rights. Why would it be different in the Second Amendment?

Of course that doesn't prohibit "reasonable" regulation of gun ownership. And what's "reasonable" is what we argue about.

John Smith; If there was no second amendment, one would still have the same right to buy a gun as to buy a can of soup.

Not really. The Constitution is mostly a restraint on the powers of government - what they can't do. If there were no Second Amendment we could possibly own guns, but it would be at the pleasure and discretion of government. And could be revoked at their pleasure. BTW; you have no "right" to buy a can of soup. It is simply how soup is often marketed.

regards,
Waddie

[Phillip Allen]

sad that every shooting has to turn into a 2nd amendment thread.
How come you blokes never want to discuss WHY?

go back and see just who is bringing up the 2nd

[BrianW]

I note that you and others fail to respond to the question as to where you would draw the line as to what "arms" the people have the right to "keep and bear".

I've seen that answered many time here. I don't think you were around then.

[Meli]

go back and see just who is bringing up the 2nd

does it matter? is it relevant?
PS I didnt bother lookin

[John Smith]

How about requiring liability and damage insurance for gun ownership? We require it for auto ownership.

I'd support that, but just like many drive without insurance, many will carry guns without insurance. Most vehicle deaths are accidents. I'm not sure a guy with a gun playing hero and killing someone is in quite the same category.

For many years I've been arguing that cars be built with a feature that a valid license and/or a valid insurance card be necessary to start the engine. If I'd had gotten any traction with that when I proposed it, virtually all cars on the road today would not start for someone who did not have a valid license. I can see that working with cars, but we couldn't do it with guns.

The fact of the matter is, IMO, we have, for whatever reasons, miscontrued the 2nd Amendment for many years and we have put ourselves in the position we are now in. There are entirely too many guns (which don't wear out in two decades like cars do) already in the hands of the public that any legislation banning any of them would be useless. Proposing such legislation would dramatically increase the sales of these weapons and put a lot more on the street before it could pass an go into affect.

There simply is no practical solution to this problem. I would support putting in place metal detectors in any store/mall/restaurant, etc. who would like them and have them hooked up to local police. If the detector finds the person walking through to be carrying metal, it would simply immediately show that particular place on a video at the police station. The police would simply get a patrol car into the immediate area while they observed the video.

This would have a cost, but it might make public places safer.

We cannot limit the guns: not possible. We can, if we have the will, make it more difficult to bring a gun or other weapon into a store and use it within that store.

I'm sure some will argue that such a system invades privacy, but I'm not sure how much privacy one has in a public place.

The point I try to make here is that we need to look for ways to cut down on violence. We may not be able to cut down on guns, but we might be able to save some lives.

[John Smith]

John... EVERYTHING is illegal in New Jersey unless there is a written law specifically allowing it

I wish they'd outlaw thunderstorms: I'm tired of them.

[Nicholas Scheuer]

All redundant! How is this thread different from the Aurora, CO (Bat Man) thread?

[Phillip Allen]

does it matter? is it relevant?
PS I didnt bother lookin

the 2nd is usually brought up by political opportunists in conjunction with any tragedy that can be associated with guns... generally in poor taste and in callous disregard to the victims.

[Peerie Maa]

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms". Everywhere else in the Constitution that the phrase "the people" is used there is widespread agreement that it refers to individual rights. Why would it be different in the Second Amendment?

regards,
Waddie

Because the 2nd is about the right to bear (as in carry) arms as a part of a well regulated melitia. It does not discuss gun ownership for any other reason.

It is possible that you may well be where you are now because your "Taxes are an abomination" culture would not pay for an effective police force.

[hanleyclifford]

Too bad the Sikh congregation didn't have a 65 year old lady with a hand gun.

[John Smith]

sad that every shooting has to turn into a 2nd amendment thread.
How come you blokes never want to discuss WHY?

That comes up from time to time. Not always in reference to guns, but frequently. I've posed the question as to why Jerry Springer's show is so popular. I'd like everyone to watch the ENTIRE Rev. Wright sermon, which is an interesting history lesson.

Let's not forget how we took the land from the natives. Or slavery. Let's not forget how proud people were when "Johnny" went off to war.

Sometimes I think, but I can't prove, that it is difficult to grow up poor and watch the big cars that the wealthier people own. While many whites deny it, the fact is that driving while black continues to be a crime, and I can see where that would anger a lot of people. I found it disturbing when the Zimmermann/Martin incident was being discussed that Zimmerman seemed to have the right to stand his ground under Florida law, but Marten didn't.

It is pretty clear that within our culture there remains an enourmous amount of racism. This has been fueled, IMO, by pointing the finger of blame for our ever decreasing opportunities at minorities, although jobs outsourced over the last three or four decades were not taken by minorities in this country.

Racism is an interesting thing: A white man hates a black man simply because he is black. The black man hates the white man because the white man hates him because he's black. Which one has justification?

[Gerarddm]

This kind of thread, and the recent tragedies, are why I dislike guns in general and 'gun people' in vehement particular.

Put all the gun people in one place and let 'em open up on each other to their hearts' content. Afterward the world would be a better place. Bah.

[hanleyclifford]

That comes up from time to time. Not always in reference to guns, but frequently. I've posed the question as to why Jerry Springer's show is so popular. I'd like everyone to watch the ENTIRE Rev. Wright sermon, which is an interesting history lesson.

Let's not forget how we took the land from the natives. Or slavery. Let's not forget how proud people were when "Johnny" went off to war.

Sometimes I think, but I can't prove, that it is difficult to grow up poor and watch the big cars that the wealthier people own. While many whites deny it, the fact is that driving while black continues to be a crime, and I can see where that would anger a lot of people. I found it disturbing when the Zimmermann/Martin incident was being discussed that Zimmerman seemed to have the right to stand his ground under Florida law, but Marten didn't.

It is pretty clear that within our culture there remains an enourmous amount of racism. This has been fueled, IMO, by pointing the finger of blame for our ever decreasing opportunities at minorities, although jobs outsourced over the last three or four decades were not taken by minorities in this country.

Racism is an interesting thing: A white man hates a black man simply because he is black. The black man hates the white man because the white man hates him because he's black. Which one has justification?

The black man hates the white man because the white man brought him here as a slave. Duh.

[Ted Hoppe]

This kind of thread, and the recent tragedies, are why I dislike guns in general and 'gun people' in vehement particular.

Put all the gun people in one place and let 'em open up on each other to their hearts' content. Afterward the world would be a better place. Bah.

Sad to know we are making new shooters every day. Why would we expect anything other than what we have?

[LeeG]

that's because we let people like YOU drive on public roads

BTW, Lee, do you work for our benovelent insurance industry?... ouir very BIG insurance industry?

Try considering the issue of public safety and personal responsibility, why not require insurance?

[wardd]

what the right doesn't admit is that laws over time and generations do affect attitudesthey said that integration couldn't be legislated but it happened and is happening in that a racist attitude is far less publicly accepted today than it once wasthe same would happen with respect to gunsin a generation or 2 phills attitude would not be accepted in proper society

[wardd]

what the right doesn't admit is that laws over time and generations do affect attitudesthey said that integration couldn't be legislated but it happened and is happening in that a racist attitude is far less publicly accepted today than it once wasthe same would happen with respect to guns, in a generation or 2 phills attitude would not be accepted in proper society

[wardd]

my editing isn't workingwhat the right doesn't admit is that laws over time and generations do affect attitudesthey said that integration couldn't be legislated but it happened and is happening in that a racist attitude is far less publicly accepted today than it once wasthe same would happen with respect to guns, in a generation or 2 phills attitude would not be accepted in proper society

[wardd]

my editing isn't working

[wardd]

what the right doesn't admit is that laws over time and generations do affect attitudesthey said that integration couldn't be legislated but it happened and is happening in that a racist attitude is far less publicly accepted today than it once was

[Steve McMahon]

Now that it is confirmed that the shooter was a white person, and it was an act of terrorism, will we now automatically call him a "Christian Terrorist" ?

[wardd]

the same would happen with respect to guns, in a generation or 2 phills attitude would not be accepted in proper society

[wardd]

post 133, that depends on his reasons

[Steve McMahon]

post 133, that depends on his reasons

Nope. I don't think you would ever see that combination of words ever used in North American media, no matter what the motives or connections. Now, if he happened to be of darker skin tone and of a differant ethnic or religious background what would his media title be....?

[Peerie Maa]

Now that it is confirmed that the shooter was a white person, and it was an act of terrorism, will we now automatically call him a "Christian Terrorist" ?

I believe that some are using the term "Neo Nazi"

Speaking at a press conference on Monday, FBI Special Agent in Charge of the Milwaukee Division, Teresa Carlson, said the shooting was a "possible domestic terrorism case".She said the FBI was investigating the suspect's reported links to white supremacist groups.
A civil rights group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, has described Page as a "frustrated neo-Nazi".
The organisation added that in 2010 Page said in an interview with a white supremacist website that he had been a member of the white-power music scene in 2000, and created a band called End Apathy, the Associated Press reports.

from the BeeB

[Flying Orca]

I believe that some are using the term "Neo Nazi"

from the BeeB[/FONT][/COLOR]

They tend to self-describe as "Christian", do they not?

[Peerie Maa]

They tend to self-describe as "Christian", do they not?

No Idea. White Supremacist has been bandied about as well. If he was Neo Nazi he may have been as enamoured of the Norse gods. There is a twisted precedent for that as well. I'd be surprised if he belonged to any church's congregation (that would have him if he was open in his views).

[Phillip Allen]

This kind of thread, and the recent tragedies, are why I dislike guns in general and 'gun people' in vehement particular.

Put all the gun people in one place and let 'em open up on each other to their hearts' content. Afterward the world would be a better place. Bah.

that's quite a wild post... full of hate and the other wild emotions that go with it... exactly (I believe) the same as the hate which was envolved in the actual shooting in Wisconsin... I hold this up as an example of what a mass killer's verbal ramblings MIGHT look like

[wardd]

a few gun owners full of hate have been in the news lately

[Phillip Allen]

a few gun owners full of hate have been in the news lately

do you equate owning a gun with being filled with hate?

[wardd]

did my last pose even infer that?

[John Smith]

Try considering the issue of public safety and personal responsibility, why not require insurance?

I like the idea, but how do you enforce it. If one man kills another with a gun, does he ge a longer sentence if he has no gun insurance?

The answer is not more guns, or less guns. If a serious law to limit guns was introduced to congress, during the time it worked its way through the House and Senate, the number of guns in public hands would double.

The answer, to the extent that there is one, comes from asking ourselves what is possible to do that will cut down on gun deaths.

Maybe I missed it, but I don't think anyone has seriously addressed the question of playing hero and killing innocent people in the process.

[John Smith]

my editing isn't working

Mine neither, and it can be a bummer.

[Phillip Allen]

did my last pose even infer that?

transferance, wardd?

[S/V Laura Ellen]

do you equate owning a gun with being filled with hate?

Phillip, you should be in the Olympics. That was one hell of a big leap. The gold medal and world record leap goes to ....

[John Smith]

what the right doesn't admit is that laws over time and generations do affect attitudesthey said that integration couldn't be legislated but it happened and is happening in that a racist attitude is far less publicly accepted today than it once was

I'm not sure I agree past the point of racism being politically incorrect. Under the surface itis alive and well and, I think, growing. The reason I think it grows is because we have to blame our bad economy and slow recovery on someone. We get the privately employed people to blame the public employee, and it's effective although I'm not aware of any private sector job being lost because we hire too many teachers. We blame immigrants. We blame Affirmative Action (blacks).

All of this is carefully orchestrated by the "job creators" who have been shipping our jobs overseas for decades.

Another point/question I've put up is that we will pass a huge debt onto my grandkids no matter what we do. We can modernize/rebuild our infrastructure and pass on more debt, a much improved infrastructure, and (hopefully) better job opportunities with higher pay OR we can pass on a little less debt. What's your choice?

It's not like there's a none of the above or an all of the above to choose from.

My vote is to spend on the infrastructure. Long term my grandkids will be glad we did.

I also think it is difficult to grow up poor when you can see so many have so much. We have a vast disparity of wealth and, IMO, this has more than just financial impact on those at the bottom end.

[John Smith]

do you equate owning a gun with being filled with hate?

I can't speak for Wardd, but I think it's reasonable to consider that owning a gun may make that hate more dangerous.

[S/V Laura Ellen]

I also think it is difficult to grow up poor when you can see so many have so much. We have a vast disparity of wealth and, IMO, this has more than just financial impact on those at the bottom end.

A lot of truth to that statement.

[John Smith]

Let's see if we can find common ground. Why do people kill other people?

Money
love/jealousy
hate

Add to the list, then let's see if we can figure out how to cut down on this without banning any guns.

I don't know if there are any statistics on this, but while I don't believe all crimes committed with guns would be committed if the criminal had to use a knife, I do believe that if he had no access to an assault rifle he'd probably settle for a revolver.

We cannot predict who will committ a crime, and we cannot arrest someone for thinking about committing a crime; even murder.

There is no practical gun control.

Let's focus, if we can, on how we can save lives.

[Phillip Allen]

I can't speak for Wardd, but I think it's reasonable to consider that owning a gun may make that hate more dangerous.

are you speaking of the hate that wardd has proposed comes with gun ownership?

[Chris Coose]

then let's see if we can figure out how to cut down on this without banning any guns.

Google up recent legislation on liberalization of gun laws around the country.

There is no "let's", as in, us citizens.

Daily gun massacres instead of weekly gun massacres may turn the tide. Keep an eye on Wisconsin for now. Nothing will change.

[hanleyclifford]

Did you see that video in post #26? There is the real problem. The trivialization of guns and violence. These are things that should never be taught as games. When it comes to our children, we reap what we sow.

[PeterSibley]

no, but some of the ignorant believe so and occasionally try to pass along their ignorance... not all that different, figuratively speaking, from giving a child a loaded gun

Yes Phil , it was just a bit of hyperbole however the US holds 3/4 of the worlds stock of privately owned firearms. 270million of them. Certainly a nice little earner for the industries involved.http://suite101.com/article/happines...rm-gun-a410517
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states

Controversy surrounds the political and legal aspects of gun ownership. But the astounding number of civilian-owned firearms in the United States is not in dispute. According to GunPolicy.org––which incorporates research supported by the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs––the U.S. is home to approximately 270 million civilian-owned guns. This exceeds three-quarters of the projected number of non-governmental firearms in every other nation (more than 350 million). Illuminating the magnitude of the disparity between the U.S. and other countries are estimated figures for total civilian gun ownership in India and China (numbers two and three in international rankings, both at 40 million); Germany, number four (25 million), and France, number five (19 million).

Read more at Suite101: Happiness is a Warm Gun | Suite101.com http://suite101.com/article/happines...#ixzz22nu5pp9I

[Kaa]

Read more at Suite101: Happiness is a Warm Gun | Suite101.com http://suite101.com/article/happines...#ixzz22nu5pp9I

Ah, yes.

Using that assessment, GunPolicy.org says the top ten firearm-owning nations are:
1. United States
2. Yemen
3. Switzerland
4. Finland
5. Serbia
6. Cyprus
7. Saudi Arabia
8. Iraq
9. Uruguay
10. Sweden


An interesting list, that.

Kaa

[S/V Laura Ellen]

no, but some of the ignorant believe so and occasionally try to pass along their ignorance... not all that different, figuratively speaking, from giving a child a loaded gun

There was a TV program on the other night that profiled a gun maker in the US that specialized in military arms (50 cal.). During an interview the owner of the company said that the company could not survive on the sales of their military line to the military only, the sales to the public was absolutely necessary for a viable business.

[Phillip Allen]

There was a TV program on the other night that profiled a gun maker in the US that specialized in military arms (50 cal.). During an interview the owner of the company said that the company could not survive on the sales of their military line to the military only, the sales to the public was absolutely necessary for a viable business.

I believe that I am somewhat famililar with the sort... their customer base is not affluent enough to let the company last long... similar to raising pit bulls and selling them. the pit bull customer will be willing to give you his wife's last check she got for plucking chickens for 'one of them manley dogs'

[Flying Orca]

GunPolicy.org says the top ten firearm-owning nations are:
1. United States
2. Yemen
3. Switzerland
4. Finland
5. Serbia
6. Cyprus
7. Saudi Arabia
8. Iraq
9. Uruguay
10. Sweden


An interesting list, that.

Kaa

No kidding. The death rates by firearm would, one imagines, be all over the map.

[wardd]

There was a TV program on the other night that profiled a gun maker in the US that specialized in military arms (50 cal.). During an interview the owner of the company said that the company could not survive on the sales of their military line to the military only, the sales to the public was absolutely necessary for a viable business.

1/2 inch is my fav varmint callibar