School Shooting

Mrleft8

Super Anarchist
27,401
4,043
Suwanee River
Not for nothin' but..... That tree looks like it was just delivered from Amazon.com, fully decorated.

 My god..... We had 3 generations of ornaments on our tree when I was a kid, and it didn't come close to half the shit on that tree.

 

Mrleft8

Super Anarchist
27,401
4,043
Suwanee River
View attachment 478426

The grain on that stock would be completely unacceptable. It would shatter/break at the point where the most force from a shot would be directed. It also would break very easily when using it as a club to finish off the guy you shot in the chest who was just gurgling up foamy blood.

 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
62,879
2,010
Punta Gorda FL
Are you saying that "offsetting" and fighting are the same thing?
Yes. What do you think militias designed to counter military force are preparing to do? 
Fight, which leaves this question:

How does a militia supposed to fight the US Government when it is under the authority of Congress, specifically to "put down insurrections"?  
My answer is: it's going to be a lot easier if the 2nd amendment prohibits them from disarming The People. How would you answer your own question?

 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
62,879
2,010
Punta Gorda FL
Tom, he asked you a question; the same question I was going to ask when you posted this:

2. Those things were not invented in 1789 so the second amendment can't possibly apply to them. Alone among the Bill of Rights, it only applies totechnology available at the time it was enacted.
 

Help us understand the relationship between what you posted and how you and others hold up the 2A to defend your perceived right to possess these weapons?

Spin away, we’re listening.
I'm not sure that post was addressed to me, but my answer is that the Bill of Rights applies to new technology as it comes along. The first amendment covers electronic communications and the fourth amendment covers using tech for surveillance. Similarly, the second amendment should apply to modern guns, not just muskets.

The Massachusetts Supreme Court concluded that the second amendment only applies to those arms invented when it was ratified, a position that some here have supported as well. SCOTUS has reversed the Mass court, but what matters in the end is political support and lots of people seem to think that the 2nd amendment, alone among the Bill of Rights, only applies to 18th century tech.

Somehow, I suspect that a court concluding that the fourth amendment was written in the 18th century, so only protects 18th century medical tech used in abortions, these people would figure out the problem, but gungrabbiness uber alles, so...

 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
62,879
2,010
Punta Gorda FL
What is the point of this post? Something about the responsibility of gun and car owners for the actions of criminals, but I can't figure it out. Can you?

It also absolves individuals of the LIABILITY FOR USE by others. So if your roommate steals your keys and bypasses your 'secure gun storage' and uses your gun to holdup a liquor store, you're totally good. But if your roommate steals your keys and runs over a little old lady with your car, well that's what you have liability insurance for.
Why ask me?
Because Olsonist won't explain what he meant and you seem to have thoughts on the liability of gun and car owners for the actions of criminals.

Also because I love questions to which the answer is obvious, but which can't be answered because TeamD.

 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
63,100
5,838
De Nile
Because Olsonist won't explain what he meant and you seem to have thoughts on the liability of gun and car owners for the actions of criminals.

Also because I love questions to which the answer is obvious, but which can't be answered because TeamD.
Tell us something we don’t know about you.

Here’s something we do know. You’re still wrong about the reason for the 2nd.

 

WhoaTed

Antichrist
1,355
568
Holland, MI
I'm not sure that post was addressed to me, but my answer is that the Bill of Rights applies to new technology as it comes along. The first amendment covers electronic communications and the fourth amendment covers using tech for surveillance. Similarly, the second amendment should apply to modern guns, not just muskets.

The Massachusetts Supreme Court concluded that the second amendment only applies to those arms invented when it was ratified, a position that some here have supported as well. SCOTUS has reversed the Mass court, but what matters in the end is political support and lots of people seem to think that the 2nd amendment, alone among the Bill of Rights, only applies to 18th century tech.

Somehow, I suspect that a court concluding that the fourth amendment was written in the 18th century, so only protects 18th century medical tech used in abortions, these people would figure out the problem, but gungrabbiness uber alles, so...
Sir, you wrote this:

2. Those things were not invented in 1789 so the second amendment can't possibly apply to them. Alone among the Bill of Rights, it only applies totechnology available at the time it was enacted.
 

…which is the opposite of what you’re writing now less than 24 hours later (and have written in the past). Either you believe that the 2A applies or you don’t, it’s one or the other. Or you’re a bullshitter and pick/choose whatever is convenient in the moment. Enlighten me sir, which is it?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mike G

Super Anarchist
8,645
2,967
Ventura County, CA
I get that the idea of locking down schools is a good concept.  My school had 3 sides that were 200+ yard long fences.  One side had houses, the other a street, and the other a stream.

My point is that some schools may be easy to funnel all students through a few locations, and others may be tough to monitor all sides, at all times.

IF it were to happen, it should be funded by gun mfgs.  Just like the cigarette ads/warnings.

 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
63,100
5,838
De Nile
I get that the idea of locking down schools is a good concept.  My school had 3 sides that were 200+ yard long fences.  One side had houses, the other a street, and the other a stream.

My point is that some schools may be easy to funnel all students through a few locations, and others may be tough to monitor all sides, at all times.

IF it were to happen, it should be funded by gun mfgs.  Just like the cigarette ads/warnings.
Our Elementary and Middle schools already have funnel points, adding detectors would be trivial. The HS is a totally different issue as it's an open campus, but there are still natural funnel points. 

I don't care about the funding if it would slow the rollout. 

 

Mid

Blues Rule
parkland-victims-with-names-1024x576.jpg


180217-parkland-victims-16up-composite.jpg


 

learningJ24

Super Anarchist
4,344
391
Agreed. Metal detectors would have caught him at the door. 
No, metal detectors would have beeped but it's up to teachers and administrators to catch someone. When I started doing morning screening (one week a semester), we were trying to do around 3000 metal scans, bag searches and coat patdowns in about 10 minutes due to contractual obligations.  There was no training nor even written directions for how were to execute these. Administrators had the hand wands for when the metal detectors beeped but generally just waved the wand in the direction of the belt buckle and passed the kid.  One of our resource officers showed me an LAPD video of an exercise where a kid was run through scanning procedure then taken into a room where he unloaded 52 firearms from under his clothing including a sawed off pump shotgun and two MAC-10's along with various other increasingly smaller handguns.  Combined with 16 doors to the outside that both teachers and students shimmed open and used throughout the day, it was not practically possible to "lockdown' the building.  And this was a building that had two shootings (both before my time). Technology will not save the situation only people will and we're breaking those very people. The actions of Admin (local control!) after the teachers brought the matter up speaks volumes as it's the normal reaction.  I had two weapons threats serious enough that I felt they needed reporting and in both cases took them to the school cop, which resulted in action. Since there's no manual for this, a new teacher would have gone to their administrator who has a lot of reasons for lowballing the incident.  

 




Top