What is the solution to mass shootings in the United States?

[Evilroddy]

First known written use of the phrase "water off a duck's back:"

"Encouraging his troops to storm Keep Vroda, Ducette Margaritte encouraged his fife with the statement "their {burning} oils will spill upon you like water off a duck's back." 1356 from Wilheilm's Illuminated Wars of the Flemish Warlords, translated 1633 Edeline Monastery author unknown. Margaritte's Belgian forces were defeated at the keep, the Flemish cauterized the advance sufficiently for greater forces to remove the Belgians from the Nederlands. (not to be confused with the Netherlands that were still underwater, nederlands being unclaimed borders subsequent to unresolved warring, a turn of the phrase so to speak)

OldFatGuy:

Your reference to the water off a duck's back idiom is very interesting. When I get the time I will look it up to verify. In the mean time I would like to extend to you a thank-you. Assuming the reference checks out, you have taught me something interesting.

So thank you.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[OldFatGuy]

OldFatGuy:

Your reference to the water off a duck's back idiom is very interesting. When I get the time I will look it up to verify. In the mean time I would like to extend to you a thank-you. Assuming the reference checks out, you have taught me something interesting.

So thank you.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Don't thank me so fast. You'll find the manuscript in the Illuminated Manuscripts Collection of the Jamaica Library, for viewing by appointment, with presentation of credentials. It is not on the internet. Not everything is on the net. Viewing any of these manuscripts requires University or Historical Society documentation, with rare exceptions. Jamaica Library is an independent Library in Jamaica Queens, not funded with taxpayer dollars, but funded with extremely generous endowments. And it is independent from the wonderful NYC Public Library System, but often works hand in hand with it. It is also associated with the Library Schools of St. John's University and CUNY.

Having professional escorted the then 78 year old Professor Valois Anschlinger of the Sorbonne while doing research at the library during a visit from France in 1992. I had no idea what I was looking at, nor could I understand the translations in this volume without his reading them to me and translating them to English. A privilege I'll never forget, and I maintain 2 volume package of notes from those 3 days. I should have been paying him for the education for more than I was being paid to for the services I provided him. Tho, fortunately, he enjoyed my company as a human being.

 

[Fraggle Rock]

Remove assault weapons the hero of Conservatism did. Scalia said they are not guaranteed under the Constitution. Remember these icons that Conservatives pray to...if that is their stance that is good enough for me.....This is just way out of hand. A hobby is not guaranteed or a collection guaranteed under the Constitution.

 

[Rucker61]

Remove assault weapons the hero of Conservatism did. Scalia said they are not guaranteed under the Constitution. Remember these icons that Conservatives pray to...if that is their stance that is good enough for me.....This is just way out of hand. A hobby is not guaranteed or a collection guaranteed under the Constitution.

Scalia never said that "assault weapons" were not protected under the Second Amendment. He did say that the Second Amendment protection extends to all firearms "in common use for lawful purposes".

 

[Fraggle Rock]

On pp. 54 and 55, the majority opinion, written by conservative bastion Justice Antonin Scalia, states: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…”. It is “…not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

“Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

 

[Rucker61]

On pp. 54 and 55, the majority opinion, written by conservative bastion Justice Antonin Scalia, states: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…”. It is “…not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

“Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

Yes, that's true. He also said that firearms in common use for lawful purposes fall under the protections of the Second Amendment. Why do you assume that if some restrictions are allowable then any restriction is allowable?

 

[TurtleDude]

Remove assault weapons the hero of Conservatism did. Scalia said they are not guaranteed under the Constitution. Remember these icons that Conservatives pray to...if that is their stance that is good enough for me.....This is just way out of hand. A hobby is not guaranteed or a collection guaranteed under the Constitution.

you're lying, Scalia never mentioned assault weapons

 

[SirGareth]

The problem is identifying dangerous folk before they do something dangerous is difficult and at best uncertain.

The Black Lives Matter people say the police are executioners

Who shall be afforded the right to bear arms?
Who shall be deemed worthy enough to have their lives protected by firearms?
In the USA we have these rights no other nations appear to have:
We have the right to say what we want and to keep and bear arms. The Supreme Court has validated this as a personal right, just like voting.
Any guns that civil police may carry are equally appropriate to be carried by citizens in the protection of their own lives.

To deprive a person who might be dangerous....is reasonable.

Licenses are not required to purchase a vehicle for private use on private land or to drive on private land.
In our country a jury is required to strip one of his civil rights, we are not NAZI Germany.

However, unless a very good case can be made....

A better case can be made for doing these things to people who are already in violation of our laws, Democrats want them free to vote for the officials of the party of handouts even when they violate our immigration laws. I cite the most dangerous places: Washington DC, Chicago etc where gun ownership is illegal. or impossibly complex.

The number and destructive capacity.....

The Thomson sub-machine gun has been easily available to criminals in the USA ever since it went into production in the 20s, An AR-15 is hardly "more lethal."

It is not the availability of lethal means that has changed in the USA but something else has.

I attended an urban high school of 1800 students in the 60s All of my friends owned their own guns since becoming 12 or 13, one of my friends brought his gun to school (to make a new stock for it in advanced wood-working shop).

No kid in my large city ever went on a shooting rampage in school or anywhere else (ever).

I suggest that cultural decay is the real cause and we need to find out what has changed.

Most of us have a firm Idea of what has gone wrong and believe it to be begotten by misguided leftist "utopianism" (families are regressive, masculinity is bullying, fathers are unnecessary because "government knows best" and is an uncritical provider to mom as well.)

There have been calls for gun regulation and registry

Virtually no one who actually owns guns in my county would ever consent to registering them since the only purpose for such a law is to preemptively confiscate them. Any such law would be universally ignored and any sheriff attempting to enforce such a law would be voted out of office in a heartbeat

The Second Amendment....just assures....a well regulated militia.

This is, of course, complete bull****. Unlike our Democrat-Marxists I can forgive you for knowing next to nothing of US history so I wont scold you over it. We do not possess arms to "save the state" and never have. The "militia" is not the national guard. We keep arms to preserve both our lives....and our liberty, not the state's. No one reading the Federalist papers or reading the correspondence of our founders carries any such ignorance based misapprehensions

But no American is allowed...thermonuclear...warheads .

How sad, is this all you have?

Our police may not save their own lives with thermonuclear weapons either, that's why they carry guns. 10 megaton warheads are inappropriate for the task and the likelihood of 10 megaton bombs doing a little collateral damage is appreciable. They aren't nor are nerve agents, surface-to-air missiles nor any weapons designed to do more than point and shoot at one person at a time who is the one that is bent on harming us.

Semi-automatic rifles, shotguns and pistols fall within the range of acceptable for self defense, nothing has changed since the 30-06 M1 Garand semi-automatic 30 caliber rifle which has been around for both military and civilian use sicne the 1920s. They shoot fast and can take down an elephant. The AR-15 .223 is a pipsqueak by comparison.

 

[Parrish]

you're lying, Scalia never mentioned assault weapons

But in a 2008 opinion that struck down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban, Justice Antonin Scalia suggested the Second Amendment shouldn't stop the U.S. from barring certain weapons.
Scalia, a strict interpreter of the Constitution, said there's an "important limitation" on the right to bear arms.
"We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of 'dangerous and unusual weapons'," Scalia wrote, in an opinion first cited by UPI over the weekend.
Scalia reiterated that sentiment in July of this year when he told Fox News Sunday that the Second Amendment leaves room for federal gun control legislation. (From Business Insider, 12/17/12)

 

[Rucker61]

But in a 2008 opinion that struck down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban, Justice Antonin Scalia suggested the Second Amendment shouldn't stop the U.S. from barring certain weapons.
Scalia, a strict interpreter of the Constitution, said there's an "important limitation" on the right to bear arms.
"We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of 'dangerous and unusual weapons'," Scalia wrote, in an opinion first cited by UPI over the weekend.
Scalia reiterated that sentiment in July of this year when he told Fox News Sunday that the Second Amendment leaves room for federal gun control legislation. (From Business Insider, 12/17/12)

Is any federal gun control legislation approved by Heller?

 

[Manc Skipper]

One simple method to cut mass shootings would be to redefine them. Make the qualifying number eight deaths, and that instantly cuts the number from 5 or 6 a year to just one or two, which is much more manageable, excuse-wise.

 

[Rucker61]

One simple method to cut mass shootings would be to redefine them. Make the qualifying number eight deaths, and that instantly cuts the number from 5 or 6 a year to just one or two, which is much more manageable, excuse-wise.

We went the other way. We reclassified mass casualty shootings as three dead, down from four dead. That took 2017 from five such shootings to eleven. 2016: 4 to 6; 2015 went from 4 to 7. Mass shootings are on the rise! That's almost a 50% increase in the last three years by the stroke of a bureaucrat's pen.

 

[OldFatGuy]

if you can't get a rifle, any type, and you want to buy a weapon for mass killing, just pick up one of Musk's flamethrowers. There are no laws against them.

 

[Rucker61]

if you can't get a rifle, any type, and you want to buy a weapon for mass killing, just pick up one of Musk's flamethrowers. There are no laws against them.

They don't appear to have much range. I was looking at those to arm teachers with. Get the kids in the closet, and when the shooter forces his way in, melt him down. Show a few of those videos and we wouldn't have school shooters.

 

[Vox]

On pp. 54 and 55, the majority opinion, written by conservative bastion Justice Antonin Scalia, states: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…”. It is “…not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

“Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

Which means you lied when you said Scalia "removed" assault weapons. He said NOTHING about assault weapons. There wasn't even a definition of "assault weapon" in his ruling--which didn't even have anything to DO with assault weapons.

People like you give the gun-haters a bad name.

 

[Fraggle Rock]

you're lying, Scalia never mentioned assault weapons

Ronnie Reagan did...did he not ban them.....

 

[Fraggle Rock]

Which means you lied when you said Scalia "removed" assault weapons. He said NOTHING about assault weapons. There wasn't even a definition of "assault weapon" in his ruling--which didn't even have anything to DO with assault weapons.

People like you give the gun-haters a bad name.

For people that like to call out liars....pay closer attention to Trumpty Dumpty. You guys kill me.

 

[Fraggle Rock]

Clingling to your Religion and guns much....:lamo Man did Obama talk the truth then .

 

[Manc Skipper]

We went the other way. We reclassified mass casualty shootings as three dead, down from four dead. That took 2017 from five such shootings to eleven. 2016: 4 to 6; 2015 went from 4 to 7. Mass shootings are on the rise! That's almost a 50% increase in the last three years by the stroke of a bureaucrat's pen.

It's still four dead, minus the shooter, who is usually killed. There was a definition of four injured, which boosted the numbers greatly.

 

[Vox]

For people that like to call out liars....pay closer attention to Trumpty Dumpty. You guys kill me.

You lied. Own it.

 

[Rucker61]

Ronnie Reagan did...did he not ban them.....

No, he signed FOPA which included the Hughes Amendment. "Assault weapons", as later defined by the 1994 AWB, were still perfectly legal to own.

 

[Rucker61]

It's still four dead, minus the shooter, who is usually killed. There was a definition of four injured, which boosted the numbers greatly.

You should tell the feds that they're wrong.

"Mass casualty shootings are rare compared to other forms of homicide; however, due to extensive media and policy
attention, as well as the number of people affected by each event, they are an important subset of crime.* Measuring
mass casualty shootings is complicated by the absence of a commonly recognized definition. Federal agencies define a
mass casualty shooting as the murder of three or more individuals."

https://ovc.ncjrs.gov/ncvrw2017/images/en_artwork/Fact_Sheets/2017NCVRW_MassShootings_508.pdf

 

[Evilroddy]

Don't thank me so fast. You'll find the manuscript in the Illuminated Manuscripts Collection of the Jamaica Library, for viewing by appointment, with presentation of credentials. It is not on the internet. Not everything is on the net. Viewing any of these manuscripts requires University or Historical Society documentation, with rare exceptions. Jamaica Library is an independent Library in Jamaica Queens, not funded with taxpayer dollars, but funded with extremely generous endowments. And it is independent from the wonderful NYC Public Library System, but often works hand in hand with it. It is also associated with the Library Schools of St. John's University and CUNY.

Having professional escorted the then 78 year old Professor Valois Anschlinger of the Sorbonne while doing research at the library during a visit from France in 1992. I had no idea what I was looking at, nor could I understand the translations in this volume without his reading them to me and translating them to English. A privilege I'll never forget, and I maintain 2 volume package of notes from those 3 days. I should have been paying him for the education for more than I was being paid to for the services I provided him. Tho, fortunately, he enjoyed my company as a human being.

OldFatGuy:

That's a pity. I was looking forward to tracking it down and having a look. Two volumes of notes accumulated in only three days? Wow, you were a busy man. Well since the source is not available I will look up the good professor and see what I can learn from anything he had/has published. Thanks again.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[Evilroddy]

The Black Lives Matter people say the police are executioners

Who shall be afforded the right to bear arms?
Who shall be deemed worthy enough to have their lives protected by firearms?
In the USA we have these rights no other nations appear to have:
We have the right to say what we want and to keep and bear arms. The Supreme Court has validated this as a personal right, just like voting.
Any guns that civil police may carry are equally appropriate to be carried by citizens in the protection of their own lives.


Licenses are not required to purchase a vehicle for private use on private land or to drive on private land.
In our country a jury is required to strip one of his civil rights, we are not NAZI Germany.


A better case can be made for doing these things to people who are already in violation of our laws, Democrats want them free to vote for the officials of the party of handouts even when they violate our immigration laws. I cite the most dangerous places: Washington DC, Chicago etc where gun ownership is illegal. or impossibly complex.


The Thomson sub-machine gun has been easily available to criminals in the USA ever since it went into production in the 20s, An AR-15 is hardly "more lethal."

It is not the availability of lethal means that has changed in the USA but something else has.

I attended an urban high school of 1800 students in the 60s All of my friends owned their own guns since becoming 12 or 13, one of my friends brought his gun to school (to make a new stock for it in advanced wood-working shop).

No kid in my large city ever went on a shooting rampage in school or anywhere else (ever).

I suggest that cultural decay is the real cause and we need to find out what has changed.

Most of us have a firm Idea of what has gone wrong and believe it to be begotten by misguided leftist "utopianism" (families are regressive, masculinity is bullying, fathers are unnecessary because "government knows best" and is an uncritical provider to mom as well.)



Virtually no one who actually owns guns in my county would ever consent to registering them since the only purpose for such a law is to preemptively confiscate them. Any such law would be universally ignored and any sheriff attempting to enforce such a law would be voted out of office in a heartbeat



This is, of course, complete bull****. Unlike our Democrat-Marxists I can forgive you for knowing next to nothing of US history so I wont scold you over it. We do not possess arms to "save the state" and never have. The "militia" is not the national guard. We keep arms to preserve both our lives....and our liberty, not the state's. No one reading the Federalist papers or reading the correspondence of our founders carries any such ignorance based misapprehensions




How sad, is this all you have?

Our police may not save their own lives with thermonuclear weapons either, that's why they carry guns. 10 megaton warheads are inappropriate for the task and the likelihood of 10 megaton bombs doing a little collateral damage is appreciable. They aren't nor are nerve agents, surface-to-air missiles nor any weapons designed to do more than point and shoot at one person at a time who is the one that is bent on harming us.

Semi-automatic rifles, shotguns and pistols fall within the range of acceptable for self defense, nothing has changed since the 30-06 M1 Garand semi-automatic 30 caliber rifle which has been around for both military and civilian use sicne the 1920s. They shoot fast and can take down an elephant. The AR-15 .223 is a pipsqueak by comparison.

View attachment 67229451

SirGareth:

Well that was an hysterical (not funny) and rambling response which used clipped quotes to eliminate nuance. I frankly don't know how to respond to that jumble of opinions passed off as fact. So I won't. It would likely just trigger another rambling response. You do however give me some small insights into a very disturbing world view which some folks out there may possess.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[SirGareth]

[/FONT]4]SirGareth:

Well that was an hysterical (not funny) and rambling response which used clipped quotes to eliminate nuance. I frankly don't know how to respond to that jumble of opinions passed off as fact. So I won't. It would likely just trigger another rambling response. You do however give me some small insights into a very disturbing world view which some folks out there may possess.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

I addressed your points more systematically but I needed to strip your original points in order to pear my response from 8500 characters to 5000 and this chopped it up quite a bit. My apologies for that.

If you keep your comments to a limited number of issues I can address them systematically.

Do you think that politicians as a class possess a greater degree of morality than the general population and as such we should trust the control of firearms to their care?