15
15
0
When will we learn? What's it going to take? Lots of great comments on several different threads but many on both sides miss the issue. Gun control is not about guns, it's ultimately about controlling the populace. If this is not true then why is there no cry for controlling bats, knives, bathtubs, cars, etc. All of these items have been used to commit violent acts. Many who advocate for stricter gun laws don't understand it is the individual who conducts bad behavior. It is not the inanimate object that we should be blaming. Each person has the free will to make good or bad decisions.
This whole thing of the 2A applying only to the militia is false. Just to clarify, the 2A is as follows: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Many don’t understand but this is a three part statement. First, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,…” refers to the collective nominative absolute of the people to organize in order to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. This is quantified by the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence as well as the Preamble to the Constitution. Second, “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms…” refers to the individual, God given, right of each person to possess any type of armament as so desired. This is further strengthened by the 1A, the 4A, the 9A and the 10A, all of which specifically refer to “the people” as individuals not as a total collective. Third, “…shall not be infringed” refers to the absolute limitation of the Federal Government’s ability to restrict the rights of the people.
Now, many say a variety of different things to include “But we need to restrict these assault weapons/rifles” or, “There’s no need for you to have a machine gun” or, my favorite, “The founding fathers did not intend the 2A to protect the right to have a machine gun, etc”. The term “assault weapon” is a misnomer and an intentional distraction. The term is a deceptive, made-up political term designed to demonize and elicit fear in those who don’t understand firearms. The next two can be summed up easily. If the founding fathers were not smart enough to anticipate “machine guns, rocket launchers, etc” as the technological advancements of arms, then they would not have been smart enough to anticipate typewriters, computers, the internet, TVs, radios, automobiles, etc and these must be restricted as well. Regardless of whether someone believes people don’t NEED something is not for them to say. For example, why would you need a vehicle capable of going 100 MPH? There’s no need for that, right? So let’s restrict cars. In fact, let’s make ALL cars able to go only up to 25 MPH in order for everyone to be safe. After all, there would be less traffic tickets and there would be less accidents. Right? Sounds stupid, doesn’t it? Why is it if someone gets a Corvette (as an example), drives it at 130 MPH down the highway and gets a speeding ticket, we hold the driver accountable for their reckless behavior? Why don’t we ban the cars? It’s the same thing with any type of armament. It is NOT the inanimate object that deserves the blame. We must hold the individual responsible for their actions.
Lastly, many call for tougher rules as if criminals are going to obey these new rules. Gun control laws do only one thing: prevent law-abiding citizens from obtaining a firearm in order to defend themselves. Prove me wrong. There are plenty of examples but I’ll highlight a few specific ones like the recent Sandy Hook incident, Columbine and Jonesboro. All of the perpetrators ILLEGALLY obtained the firearms they misused in their crimes. Over 40 laws were broken in Sandy Hook where firearms were heavily restricted in the first place. No additional restrictive laws would have helped. Look at all the high crime areas in the country like Chicago, D.C., NY, etc. They all have extremely restrictive firearm laws yet they have a higher rate of violence than less restrictive localities. Why is that? Over 50K various gun laws throughout the years never stopped Charles Whitman, Carl Brown, Abdelkrim Belachheb, James Huberty, Patrick Sherrill, William Cruse, Richard Farley, Patrick Purdy, Joseph Wesbecker, James Pough, George Hennard, Gang Lu, Thomas McIlvane, Eric Houston, John Miller, Gian Ferri, Kenneth French, Colin Ferguson, Nathan Dunlap, Dean Mellberg, James Simpson, Roland Smith, Clifton McCree, Arthur Wise, Arturo Torres, Matthew Beck, Mitchell Johnson, Andrew Golden, Kipland Kinkel, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, Mark Barton, Larry Ashbrook, Byran Uyesugi, Silvio Leyva, Michael McDermott, William Baker, Douglas Williams, Nathan Gale, Terry Ratzmann, Jeffrey Weise, Jennifer Marco, Kyle Huff, Charles Roberts, Sulejman Talovia, Seung-Hui Cho, Tyler Peterson, Robert Hawkins, Charles Thornton, Steven Kazmierczak, Wesley Higdon, Robert Stewart, Jiverly Wong, Nidal Hasan, Maurice Clemmons, Omar Thornton, Jared Loughner, Eduardo Sencion, Scott Dekraai, One Goh, Ian Stawicki, James Holmes, Wade Page. Total murdered or injured: over 952 INNOCENT people. Prove to me that additional laws would have prevented ANY of these crimes. You can’t because it is practically impossible to prevent someone from committing a crime. Think about it. THEY are making a CHOICE to commit a crime. What we can do though is STOP that person from FURTHERING their crime.
All laws pertaining to any restriction of firearms are wholly unconstitutional, to include the restrictions on military bases. We all have the free will to make our own decisions but we also must be willing to accept responsibility for those choices. In the end, all of our rights are God given and can’t be taken away by anyone else, but they CAN be infringed upon. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is YOUR decision to seek and protect each one of those for yourself and your family. Don’t restrict others because of your personal fear. Are you willing to bet YOUR life, and the lives of YOUR family, that the government WILL protect you? Are you truly willing to turn over that responsibility to someone else instead of YOU?
http://news.yahoo.com/reports-shots-fired-oregon-high-school-media-160613532.html
This whole thing of the 2A applying only to the militia is false. Just to clarify, the 2A is as follows: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Many don’t understand but this is a three part statement. First, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,…” refers to the collective nominative absolute of the people to organize in order to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. This is quantified by the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence as well as the Preamble to the Constitution. Second, “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms…” refers to the individual, God given, right of each person to possess any type of armament as so desired. This is further strengthened by the 1A, the 4A, the 9A and the 10A, all of which specifically refer to “the people” as individuals not as a total collective. Third, “…shall not be infringed” refers to the absolute limitation of the Federal Government’s ability to restrict the rights of the people.
Now, many say a variety of different things to include “But we need to restrict these assault weapons/rifles” or, “There’s no need for you to have a machine gun” or, my favorite, “The founding fathers did not intend the 2A to protect the right to have a machine gun, etc”. The term “assault weapon” is a misnomer and an intentional distraction. The term is a deceptive, made-up political term designed to demonize and elicit fear in those who don’t understand firearms. The next two can be summed up easily. If the founding fathers were not smart enough to anticipate “machine guns, rocket launchers, etc” as the technological advancements of arms, then they would not have been smart enough to anticipate typewriters, computers, the internet, TVs, radios, automobiles, etc and these must be restricted as well. Regardless of whether someone believes people don’t NEED something is not for them to say. For example, why would you need a vehicle capable of going 100 MPH? There’s no need for that, right? So let’s restrict cars. In fact, let’s make ALL cars able to go only up to 25 MPH in order for everyone to be safe. After all, there would be less traffic tickets and there would be less accidents. Right? Sounds stupid, doesn’t it? Why is it if someone gets a Corvette (as an example), drives it at 130 MPH down the highway and gets a speeding ticket, we hold the driver accountable for their reckless behavior? Why don’t we ban the cars? It’s the same thing with any type of armament. It is NOT the inanimate object that deserves the blame. We must hold the individual responsible for their actions.
Lastly, many call for tougher rules as if criminals are going to obey these new rules. Gun control laws do only one thing: prevent law-abiding citizens from obtaining a firearm in order to defend themselves. Prove me wrong. There are plenty of examples but I’ll highlight a few specific ones like the recent Sandy Hook incident, Columbine and Jonesboro. All of the perpetrators ILLEGALLY obtained the firearms they misused in their crimes. Over 40 laws were broken in Sandy Hook where firearms were heavily restricted in the first place. No additional restrictive laws would have helped. Look at all the high crime areas in the country like Chicago, D.C., NY, etc. They all have extremely restrictive firearm laws yet they have a higher rate of violence than less restrictive localities. Why is that? Over 50K various gun laws throughout the years never stopped Charles Whitman, Carl Brown, Abdelkrim Belachheb, James Huberty, Patrick Sherrill, William Cruse, Richard Farley, Patrick Purdy, Joseph Wesbecker, James Pough, George Hennard, Gang Lu, Thomas McIlvane, Eric Houston, John Miller, Gian Ferri, Kenneth French, Colin Ferguson, Nathan Dunlap, Dean Mellberg, James Simpson, Roland Smith, Clifton McCree, Arthur Wise, Arturo Torres, Matthew Beck, Mitchell Johnson, Andrew Golden, Kipland Kinkel, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, Mark Barton, Larry Ashbrook, Byran Uyesugi, Silvio Leyva, Michael McDermott, William Baker, Douglas Williams, Nathan Gale, Terry Ratzmann, Jeffrey Weise, Jennifer Marco, Kyle Huff, Charles Roberts, Sulejman Talovia, Seung-Hui Cho, Tyler Peterson, Robert Hawkins, Charles Thornton, Steven Kazmierczak, Wesley Higdon, Robert Stewart, Jiverly Wong, Nidal Hasan, Maurice Clemmons, Omar Thornton, Jared Loughner, Eduardo Sencion, Scott Dekraai, One Goh, Ian Stawicki, James Holmes, Wade Page. Total murdered or injured: over 952 INNOCENT people. Prove to me that additional laws would have prevented ANY of these crimes. You can’t because it is practically impossible to prevent someone from committing a crime. Think about it. THEY are making a CHOICE to commit a crime. What we can do though is STOP that person from FURTHERING their crime.
All laws pertaining to any restriction of firearms are wholly unconstitutional, to include the restrictions on military bases. We all have the free will to make our own decisions but we also must be willing to accept responsibility for those choices. In the end, all of our rights are God given and can’t be taken away by anyone else, but they CAN be infringed upon. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is YOUR decision to seek and protect each one of those for yourself and your family. Don’t restrict others because of your personal fear. Are you willing to bet YOUR life, and the lives of YOUR family, that the government WILL protect you? Are you truly willing to turn over that responsibility to someone else instead of YOU?
http://news.yahoo.com/reports-shots-fired-oregon-high-school-media-160613532.html
Shooting (Sport)
Freedom
Honesty
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 15
3
3
0
SSG Redondo,
Every time one of these nut cases decides to show up at a school with a gun I am forced to relive the Columbine Massacre. No, I was not in the school, although I tried to get in as fast as possible. My mother was a teacher at the school for right at 30 years. A very good friend was the teacher who made the 911 call from the library. I am far from alone in the emotions that these more and more common incidents bring back to the surface.
Everyone wants to point in all kinds of stupid directions, purely to push their own agenda. Instead why doesn't society as a whole step back and ask why this seems to be building speed? It was a rhetorical question obviously. The real answer hurts feelings. We have become a weak self absorbed nation who has forgotten what it means to be a parent. Parents and schools alike are breading a generation of kids who have been coddled to the extent that they cannot handle failure or rejection. "Oh woe with me", has become "lets just go shoot somebody". Stop looking at guns and the mental heath industry as this is just another example of not taking responsibility. Instead look in the mirror and ask who is really raising your children. If it is the TV set, laptop and or the favorite video game instead of you... You are the problem. Step up, put down the cell phone for a while and be a parent.
Every time one of these nut cases decides to show up at a school with a gun I am forced to relive the Columbine Massacre. No, I was not in the school, although I tried to get in as fast as possible. My mother was a teacher at the school for right at 30 years. A very good friend was the teacher who made the 911 call from the library. I am far from alone in the emotions that these more and more common incidents bring back to the surface.
Everyone wants to point in all kinds of stupid directions, purely to push their own agenda. Instead why doesn't society as a whole step back and ask why this seems to be building speed? It was a rhetorical question obviously. The real answer hurts feelings. We have become a weak self absorbed nation who has forgotten what it means to be a parent. Parents and schools alike are breading a generation of kids who have been coddled to the extent that they cannot handle failure or rejection. "Oh woe with me", has become "lets just go shoot somebody". Stop looking at guns and the mental heath industry as this is just another example of not taking responsibility. Instead look in the mirror and ask who is really raising your children. If it is the TV set, laptop and or the favorite video game instead of you... You are the problem. Step up, put down the cell phone for a while and be a parent.
(3)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Well said, SFC. You're absolutely right part of the problem is a lack of parenting. Sadly, it comes from the lower of standards, morals and ethics that has come about from the "anything goes" mentality.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
One point that is being brushed under the rug by the media is that this shooting could have been a lot worse. The shooter had a bag with many magazines for his AR-15 and handgun. However, there were two armed police resource officers at the school who responded within 90 seconds and cornered the kid before he could kill anyone else. Since these type of shooters are usually attention seeking cowards and not someone who wants to engage in a gunfight with people who shoot back, he killed himself (like the Vegas shooters at WalMart). Bottom-line, good guys with guns are the first line of defense against crazies intent on doing harm.
(3)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Well said, sir. This sums it up very well too. Sadly, many still won't understand.
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
As an observation for those who want an actual solution instead of a grand stand, stop threatening those who abide by laws with more laws, stop with the name calling. Start with an actual open idea forum and accept that people from other political leanings may actually have good ideas sometimes.
SSG Redondo, good post.
SSG Redondo, good post.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
SSG,
I think everyone uses these mass killings for their own.
1. Guns rights/control activists will use it to argue their need for more/less guns.
2. Mental health professionals will use it to argue for more need for identifying and preventing the psychological disorders that cause them (I might fall into this department admittedly)
3. Media uses it for attention because the sensationalism draws a tremendous amount of attention.
I do fear that giving these killings so much attention do result in copycats (as has been observed in a number of cases where media promotes behavior; Gladwell's Tipping Point expands on this nicely). Hopefully this trend does not continue and we are able to do what is necessary to prevent them.
I think everyone uses these mass killings for their own.
1. Guns rights/control activists will use it to argue their need for more/less guns.
2. Mental health professionals will use it to argue for more need for identifying and preventing the psychological disorders that cause them (I might fall into this department admittedly)
3. Media uses it for attention because the sensationalism draws a tremendous amount of attention.
I do fear that giving these killings so much attention do result in copycats (as has been observed in a number of cases where media promotes behavior; Gladwell's Tipping Point expands on this nicely). Hopefully this trend does not continue and we are able to do what is necessary to prevent them.
(3)
(0)
CPT Kyle Schembechler
The Sun News Network up in Canada isn't giving the guy who killed the police officers the time of day. Maybe we could learn from this?
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2014/06/20 [login to see] 04.html
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2014/06/20 [login to see] 04.html
(4)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
That sounds like a good idea to me. I give it more credence than most of the ideas I've heard because it is coming from someone of roughly the same generation as the people who are executing these attacks. My guess is you have a perspective on what is motivating the perpetrators that older generations lack.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Cadet 1SG, nice article. I agree too with 1LT Martin. Giving credence to those who committ these crimes is especially egregious. Do you all remember the Ohio rapist who kept three women hostage? One of the women wrote a book about the trauma she endured. In it she references the guy as just that "the guy" or "the dude". Doesn't mention him by name, and neither will I.
(0)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
That's great. The Columbine shooters also were attention seekers and wanted their names to always be remembered. If we as a society stop publicizing these sickos and people know that their names will not be treated like evil deities, they might reconsider.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
SSG Redondo:
Excellent post! The reason why the government attempts to outlaw firearms comes down to one simple word: CONTROL.
These last few decades of our history has shown an increasing desire of our federal government to control every facet of America citizens' lives, their choices, and their lifestyles. The last bastion of resistance to this ever-increasing encroachment to Freedom and Liberty is firearms. With firearms, The People can resist. History has shown that when a populace is disarmed, the central government wields unlimited power over the populace. History has also shown that in the case of tyrants and dictators, when they have disarmed their people, mass executions in the hundreds of thousands or millions of people have occurred.
It is my opinion that the increasing frequency of firearms related events have been engineered so as to allow either the same (previously defeated) or new anti-gun legislation to be (re-)introduced in Congress. Many may call this "paranoid" thinking, but if you look at many of these incidents, gun control legislation was introduced either the same day or within days of each incident. Writing bills is not a quick or easy thing to do, and getting them into consideration in the House is even more difficult and time-consuming. To me, this shows that these bills were written in advance and were ready to go. Could Congressmembers have written these in advance and had them "stored up?" Sure, that is possible. But then if this were the case, then this just goes to prove the Congressmember's desire to violate the US Constitution.
Furthermore, in a few cases, each time a major gun control bill is defeated, another firearms related incident occurs soon after, allowing for another "bite at the apple" with even more emotion attached to it. As Military professionals, we are trained to observe and look for patterns. This has been a pattern since President Reagan was shot in an attempted assassination.
In almost every one of the more publicized shooting incidents, the shooters were psychologically ill and were on psychotropic medication. At the best, it shows that the shooters were not capable of making informed critical decisions, and thus should not have had access to firearms. At worst, there have been suggestions that these people have been directed, nudged, etc. into committing the acts that they did. Again, this may sound "paranoid," but our government has in its history, several programs geared towards mind control and psychological manipulation. Also consider that the Army has an entire branch for Psychological Operations (now called MISO). Today's drug technology and the fact that we are as a nation are medicating children more than any other time in our history.
Any time a child dares to show creativity and independence from the strict guidelines of what is considered "Education" today, or just shows signs of being a child, s/he is slapped with an ADD, ADHD, or other diagnosis, and put on mood-altering drugs. After years of these mood-altering drugs, what is considered entertainment on TV, mainstream media news broadcasts, and violent video games, the stage is set for disaster.
The bottom line here is that government needs to concentrate on doing the things that they were ordered to do by the Constitution and no more. Parents need to both be more active in their childrens' lives and take more responsibility for raising their children and ensuring they become responsible adults who know Right from Wrong.
Excellent post! The reason why the government attempts to outlaw firearms comes down to one simple word: CONTROL.
These last few decades of our history has shown an increasing desire of our federal government to control every facet of America citizens' lives, their choices, and their lifestyles. The last bastion of resistance to this ever-increasing encroachment to Freedom and Liberty is firearms. With firearms, The People can resist. History has shown that when a populace is disarmed, the central government wields unlimited power over the populace. History has also shown that in the case of tyrants and dictators, when they have disarmed their people, mass executions in the hundreds of thousands or millions of people have occurred.
It is my opinion that the increasing frequency of firearms related events have been engineered so as to allow either the same (previously defeated) or new anti-gun legislation to be (re-)introduced in Congress. Many may call this "paranoid" thinking, but if you look at many of these incidents, gun control legislation was introduced either the same day or within days of each incident. Writing bills is not a quick or easy thing to do, and getting them into consideration in the House is even more difficult and time-consuming. To me, this shows that these bills were written in advance and were ready to go. Could Congressmembers have written these in advance and had them "stored up?" Sure, that is possible. But then if this were the case, then this just goes to prove the Congressmember's desire to violate the US Constitution.
Furthermore, in a few cases, each time a major gun control bill is defeated, another firearms related incident occurs soon after, allowing for another "bite at the apple" with even more emotion attached to it. As Military professionals, we are trained to observe and look for patterns. This has been a pattern since President Reagan was shot in an attempted assassination.
In almost every one of the more publicized shooting incidents, the shooters were psychologically ill and were on psychotropic medication. At the best, it shows that the shooters were not capable of making informed critical decisions, and thus should not have had access to firearms. At worst, there have been suggestions that these people have been directed, nudged, etc. into committing the acts that they did. Again, this may sound "paranoid," but our government has in its history, several programs geared towards mind control and psychological manipulation. Also consider that the Army has an entire branch for Psychological Operations (now called MISO). Today's drug technology and the fact that we are as a nation are medicating children more than any other time in our history.
Any time a child dares to show creativity and independence from the strict guidelines of what is considered "Education" today, or just shows signs of being a child, s/he is slapped with an ADD, ADHD, or other diagnosis, and put on mood-altering drugs. After years of these mood-altering drugs, what is considered entertainment on TV, mainstream media news broadcasts, and violent video games, the stage is set for disaster.
The bottom line here is that government needs to concentrate on doing the things that they were ordered to do by the Constitution and no more. Parents need to both be more active in their childrens' lives and take more responsibility for raising their children and ensuring they become responsible adults who know Right from Wrong.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SGT Unger, thank you and very well said. Your last paragraph sums it up neatly. Government must get back to its limitations as dictated by the Constitution, and society must get back to understanding right from wrong. Unfortunately, as you stated above, emotionality plays a big part in what many try to do. Sadly, too many swallow the lies hook, line and sinker.
I'm going to create a new thread soon on some of this deceptiveness.
I'm going to create a new thread soon on some of this deceptiveness.
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SPC Randall Davis
Not being paranoid, but consider the possibility of a Gov't. operation of inserting subliminal messages into today's Video Games!? Potentially after enough hours of playing these games, there's a trigger that causes the implanted messages to cause the Subject to go berzerk? What If.......
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
We have a Societal problem with all these school shootings. Have you noticed these shootings are happening in mostly Suburban locations, not in crime ridden, gang infested, inner city schools? Most if not all of the shooters are white, from "good families", and it always seems to come out of nowhere? What ever happenned to teenagers just settling differences with a good old fashioned fist fight? Nothing wrong with a bloody nose? Before joining the Military I served almost 10 years in Law Enforcement, working neighborhoods the TV show COPS refused to film in. Just an observation, my 2 cents, we've got this gaming generation that plays the "active shooter" scenario games, Grand Theft Auto, and the like. Before you young bucks blast me for blaming games, just take a moment and really look at these games. They simulate 1st person, point of view shooting. They do it almost too well, and these young men have that 1% stupid genetic fluke that tells there brain to act this out. I've observed this trend with our Country being paved with Suburbs full of helicopter parents and soccer moms. Issue #1 Graduation for Kindergarten, WTF? This begins the indoctrination, there should be no special ceremony for basic life expectations. They include cap and gowns plus graduation cakes, and it continues on and on. It used to be a NORMAL EXPECTATION that you can go from kindergarten into the 1st Grade, no big deal. This mentality of not wanting to have a kid's feelings hurt leads to these Teenagers and 20 somethings that don't have the Life adapting skills to deal with Failure and adversity. Life's not always fair and what we're seeing now is this soft generation that doesn't know how to deal with Life's challenges, disappointments and setbacks. I know not every young white male is like this but there is a common thread that's pushed right now of materialism, pop culture Idolism, and entertainment driven crap. I was a teenager with a gun rack with 4 rifles and a shotgun, no M4 but I got one as an Adult. I never once thought about settling a score at school by taking my 12GA. to school with me. There will be fingerpointing forever but for now the Gun Control needs to start in the homes. Responsible firearm ownership and perhaps some honest to God talking with our children, not guns are bad talks, that's the last thing I'm advocating, just communication. We'll see, until then, let's start a new School Police or Armed Security Department, nationwide. Not a militant, unfriendly group, but organized, trained, ARMED law enforcement and Military veterans trained in active shooter response, de-escaltion techniques, with professional uniforms, standards, training, and expectations. Do it hand in hand with municipal Law Enforcement and use Community Policing techniques that will not put fear into the public. I work in Industrial Security know as a SGT. and spit shine my boots, make sure all my Officers are squared away and strive to make it look good. If you look and act Professional, people treat you like a Professional. All of my Officers are Army Vets too, I'm lucky. My point being our society is at a point now, unfortunately, where we need to meet force with force. It'd be a big deterrent for these shooters to know that there's more than 1 lone school resource officer, there's a whole bunch of trained, ARMED Men and Women standing vigilant to stop the needless bloodshed.
(2)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
We have a media perception problem, in that only shootings that are sensational enough to draw headlines (ie in white, suburban locations) are worth reporting. Also, there is a mis-perception that these things happen all the time. They don't. Statistically speaking, with the amount of firearms that are in this country, these incidents are really outlying blips that are the exception not the norm. The media and anti-gun zealots want you to believe that the only people out there buying guns are the ones going out and shooting people.
(0)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Well said. Todays kids are not taught or conditioned to realize that failure is part of Life. So that when they fail, they have no way of dealing with it other than what they have been doing on their XBOXs or PS3/4s. So they do what they think works in their video games. However video games do not represent real life, where regular people on the street may shoot back or prevent you from being that GTA rockstar.
I carry whenever and wherever I can. Living off-post now makes this a lot easier. I was a Corrections Officer prior to the Army, so I know de-escalation techniques, unarmed combat, and ROEs. I follow firearms laws and keep up with changes that apply to me. I am a member of the US Concealed Carry Association and have firearms legal insurance through them. So I would not hesitate to intervene in a situation where I could positively contribute or even prevent an larger incident.
I carry whenever and wherever I can. Living off-post now makes this a lot easier. I was a Corrections Officer prior to the Army, so I know de-escalation techniques, unarmed combat, and ROEs. I follow firearms laws and keep up with changes that apply to me. I am a member of the US Concealed Carry Association and have firearms legal insurance through them. So I would not hesitate to intervene in a situation where I could positively contribute or even prevent an larger incident.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
The shootings are a sign of a sick society. Even if we had no guns, the people who perpetrate such crimes would find another means of raising havoc among the targeted population. Knifes and bombs as in recent incidents comes to mind. It's the person who kills, not the weapon used.
One of the differences between now and "back then" is the media. Paul Harvey did a bit about a school bombing and the rest of the story was that it happened back during the Depression. Few people heard of it because it happened in a remote area and communications then isn't what it is now. Today we have instant news coverage and competition between networks makes them go over things in details. It stirs the emotions and creates copy cats.
People who are anti-gun use these episodes as excuses for ranting their rhetoric about how dangerous guns are, but the fact of the matter is....
Do the math yourself...
Drunk drivers kill more people than guns.
The number of people killed by "crazies" is very small compared to drunk driving or any other form of killing.
When are they going out outlaw cars due to people killed by drunk drivers. As you know, it would be hard to kill someone if you can't drive. It must be the car's fault.
Are we going to outlaw bricks, knives, stones, pipes, bats, etc?
When a certain religious cult drank poisoned drinks, they blamed the leader, not the poison or the beverage company.
When are these anti-gun people going to look at what they are saying and realize the make no sense?
This is a case of calling a spade a spade. Put the blame where it belongs.
(PS - For those of you think that calling a spade a spade is racial, it is not. It goes back to the days when people would call any kind of digging tool that looked like a shovel a shovel when it was indeed a spade. So it meant calling it what it is...A spade is a spade not a shovel.)
A major point is if we let the 2nd Amendment get changed, where does it stop. Will they try to change the 1st Amendment next. The Bill of Rights was put there because our Fore Fathers felt not enough emphasis was placed on our personal rights. No one today has the right to change those right. It defines us as a people and as a nation. Leave all of the Bill of Rights alone.
One of the differences between now and "back then" is the media. Paul Harvey did a bit about a school bombing and the rest of the story was that it happened back during the Depression. Few people heard of it because it happened in a remote area and communications then isn't what it is now. Today we have instant news coverage and competition between networks makes them go over things in details. It stirs the emotions and creates copy cats.
People who are anti-gun use these episodes as excuses for ranting their rhetoric about how dangerous guns are, but the fact of the matter is....
Do the math yourself...
Drunk drivers kill more people than guns.
The number of people killed by "crazies" is very small compared to drunk driving or any other form of killing.
When are they going out outlaw cars due to people killed by drunk drivers. As you know, it would be hard to kill someone if you can't drive. It must be the car's fault.
Are we going to outlaw bricks, knives, stones, pipes, bats, etc?
When a certain religious cult drank poisoned drinks, they blamed the leader, not the poison or the beverage company.
When are these anti-gun people going to look at what they are saying and realize the make no sense?
This is a case of calling a spade a spade. Put the blame where it belongs.
(PS - For those of you think that calling a spade a spade is racial, it is not. It goes back to the days when people would call any kind of digging tool that looked like a shovel a shovel when it was indeed a spade. So it meant calling it what it is...A spade is a spade not a shovel.)
A major point is if we let the 2nd Amendment get changed, where does it stop. Will they try to change the 1st Amendment next. The Bill of Rights was put there because our Fore Fathers felt not enough emphasis was placed on our personal rights. No one today has the right to change those right. It defines us as a people and as a nation. Leave all of the Bill of Rights alone.
(2)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
hell the easiest way to conduct a mass killing at a school is to drive your car through a playground during recess....
(1)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Exactly, Gunny!
Unfortunately, the First Amendment has been diluted enough already so as to make it inconsequential already. For example, "Free Speech Zones" where outside of the established "zone" you can be arrested for speaking your mind. I believe it was the NDAA 2012 that made it a crime to insult the president anywhere that either the president or Secret Service was. So if an advance team of Secret Service was in a hotel where you were protesting, you can be arrested for threatening the president.
But I agree that the 2nd protects the 1st and the rest of the Amendments. Without the 2nd, all the rest of our rights are fair game for tyranny.
Unfortunately, the First Amendment has been diluted enough already so as to make it inconsequential already. For example, "Free Speech Zones" where outside of the established "zone" you can be arrested for speaking your mind. I believe it was the NDAA 2012 that made it a crime to insult the president anywhere that either the president or Secret Service was. So if an advance team of Secret Service was in a hotel where you were protesting, you can be arrested for threatening the president.
But I agree that the 2nd protects the 1st and the rest of the Amendments. Without the 2nd, all the rest of our rights are fair game for tyranny.
(2)
(0)
GySgt William Hardy
LTC Labrador, that is right. When the Superintendent of our school started making plans for a new entrance so that people had to go through the offfice to gain entry to the school, I asked him if he was going to put up steel and concrete post across the entry ways around the school to prevent a nut from driving their truck through the doors and down the hallways. Guess what was added.....
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
SSG Redondo - You could not be more correct. This anti-gun movement is to disarm the populace so we can be more easily controlled. A man with a gun is a citizen, a man without a gun is a subject. What about cars? Cars kill more people than guns do. How many lives are saved each year by someone having a gun? There was a country where only police and military had guns it was called Germany 1930s.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Cpl Wagner, thank you. I appreciate it. It's not so much an anti-gun movement (although there are some who ARE anti-gun) but more so an anti-freedom movement. There are many who do wish to re-enslave the populace, regardless of ethnicity, gender or color of their skin.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
It seems like you have summarized all of the most popular rhetoric in favor of gun rights in this one post. I agree with the rhetoric and I am 'molon labe' all the way.
That being said, there is still a pressing issue in our country. Young men are seeking out ways to injure and kill their peers. You and I agree it is not the guns causing this, but I would like to discuss what is causing it.
I have my ideas, but they are just ideas. I lack convincing evidence to know if my ideas are correct or not. I would also like to hear other people's input. Its frustrating to hear about these stories which undermine our security and then simply revisit the same argument about gun control versus our inalienable right to maintain the ability to forcibly prevent tyranny.
That being said, there is still a pressing issue in our country. Young men are seeking out ways to injure and kill their peers. You and I agree it is not the guns causing this, but I would like to discuss what is causing it.
I have my ideas, but they are just ideas. I lack convincing evidence to know if my ideas are correct or not. I would also like to hear other people's input. Its frustrating to hear about these stories which undermine our security and then simply revisit the same argument about gun control versus our inalienable right to maintain the ability to forcibly prevent tyranny.
(2)
(0)
Cpl Brett Wagner
1LT M. I can tell you what is causing it. It is our new, well fairly new about 10-15 yrs, candy a$$ everyone gets a trophy crybaby society. When I went to school 2 guys did not get along we woulf fight and that would be the end of it. Today a kid gets picked on and protects himself and he gets suspended just like the bully WTF. We are turning our kids into weak and worthless individuals who think they should get everything they want free. My sons come home with all this crazy information from school and their teachers. When I went to school teachers did not offer their own opinions or politics because they knew it was wrong to do so. What America is missing is good old discipline. Holy crap where is the Tylenol?
(6)
(0)
CPT Kyle Schembechler
I would argue that the asinine sense of entitlement of certain young people plays a big role. Be it women as in the case of that weirdo at UCSB, wanting to feel powerful or just straightforward media attention. I know this may be just one piece of a very large and complex puzzle, but the whole "I want something and therefore I should have it right away" attitude can't be helping.
(6)
(0)
PO1 John Y.
Cpl Wagner, if I may also add.... SSG Redondo was sure to point out that our rights are God-given. The other problem with the schools and lack of discipline is the lack of prayer. They took God out the schools, so Hell broke loose. They continue to try to remove God from different parts of the country and Satan gets more of foothold. Especially on young, easily-influenced minds.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
1LT Martin, it is not rhetoric but the truth. Please don't mistake my writing as that. I know you agree with what I wrote though.
The fact of the matter is there is a severe lack of understanding what true freedom is about along with the responsibility inherent in it. As I explained above, we ALL have the right to do as we so desire but it is incumbent on each one of us to be responsibile in our decisions. For example, you have the right to walk across I-35 but it would be very irresponsible of you to do so without looking before you do so. Then again, it would probably not be very wise in the first place.
Oh, as to your question, I KNOW what the answer is. Unfortunately, many on BOTH sides are scared of it. I do address it in the writing above. :D
The fact of the matter is there is a severe lack of understanding what true freedom is about along with the responsibility inherent in it. As I explained above, we ALL have the right to do as we so desire but it is incumbent on each one of us to be responsibile in our decisions. For example, you have the right to walk across I-35 but it would be very irresponsible of you to do so without looking before you do so. Then again, it would probably not be very wise in the first place.
Oh, as to your question, I KNOW what the answer is. Unfortunately, many on BOTH sides are scared of it. I do address it in the writing above. :D
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
That is the best explanation of the second amendment I have ever read SSG Redondo. I agree with everything you said. You are right, too many take the Constitution out of context. It seems that in this day of violence, people only want to pick and choose certain parts of the Constitution to make their claim. In my logic class that was referred to as a fallacy of suppressed evidence. The preamble to the Constitution reinforces the intentions of the Bill of Rights.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
LCpl, thank you appreciate it. The truth IS out there. All depends on whether a person wishes to really hear and listen. It's a tough pill to swallow sometimes but it's nevertheless very clear.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google