You still confuse a right with someone's misuse of an object
and what is your purpose with calling slain children Heroes of the second amendment
Misuse? What misuse. A firearm is made to shoot a projectile and hit an object. That is its intended use. To use it to nail something into apiece of wood might be a misuse. But to intentionally fire a bullet from it by squeezing a trigger is exactly the way it is suppose to be used. One cannot separate the object from the right to keep and bear that same object because that is the language of the Second Amendment. Or are you going to tell us that the Second Amendment is only to keep and bear arms but not fire them? That would be absurd.
My purpose of calling the high school kids killed in Ohio heroes of the Second Amendment is because that is what they are. All of us live in a society where the Second Amendment is in effect. Part of that is the fact that in some areas there are more firearms than there are actual people. The proliferation of firearms means that we live in a society with a large number of firearms owned by a very large number of people. Connect the dots.
You were afraid to answer my question before so Captain America did it for you. If there were no guns, there could be no American shot here. If there were but a single gun in the land, it could be easily controlled and there would be no large numbers of people killed each year with firearms. Same if there were but one gun per state. But that is not the reality of America. The reality of America is that we have a Second Amendment and we have millions upon million of guns and we have simply crossed over the tipping point with them. We now get all kinds of collateral damage from them. And we all live with the possibility that we can become collateral damage at any time on any day for almost any reason beyond our own control.
The kids at Columbine suffered that fate.
The kids in Ohio suffered that fate.
The adults at Virginia Tech.
I could add to that list from the historical record but the point is made.
This is the America we live in. As such, this is a reality we accept. So that the good of the Second Amendment can be present in America - and I have repeatedly stated that on balance the Second Amendment is more good than bad - and the good things associated with the right to keep and bear arms can work in the land, we accept the collateral damage. We accept the reality that our children can die at any die for reasons that are senseless to us. We accept the reality people will commit crimes with guns, that people will commit suicide with guns, that there will be accidents with guns - and we all know the results. So we are all potential heroes of the Second Amendment in that we permit this, we allow this, we tolerate this, we accept this as American citizens. And when innocent citizens actually pay the price of that right to keep and bear arms with their own lives, they are true heroes.
Turtle - it does not matter if you agree with me or not on this issue. It does not matter if you accept my explanation on this issue. It is irrelevant if you do or not.
One cannot do as you have clearly stated and operate under the false self imposed belief that the Second Amendment is a pure good - a mitzvah - from which no bad can happen or flow. There are good advantages to the Second Amendment and there are negatives to the second Amendment. It is not the mitzvah or a Pure Good you believe it to be. No work of man can be for we are human and to be human is to err sometimes.
Some of your fellow posters who are very supportive of weapons have seen this argument and side with it. What prevents you from seeing reality?