Guns are still America’s religion

lizkat

Watching March roll out real winter
Posts
7,341
Reaction score
15,163
Location
Catskill Mountains
They'll next need steel-plated hats or maybe new age helmets that cover the top of the torso. Hell, maybe steel suits are coming soon-ish :mad:

All because we supposedly need arms borne in the care of a well-regulated militia to protect the body politic.

Seemed to me --and not least right around the time the Sandy Hook school shooting occurred-- that as a nation we had already fallen way short of "well regulated" arms-bearing, never mind how militia might fit into our modern 2A picture. tbh it might seem like there's more self-regulation than formal legal constraints on straw purchasers runnin' and gunnin' their hauls from states with lax laws to states with stricter ones... i mean they keep getting away with it because the buy-sides of the original transactions ARE STILL --absurdly-- ENTIRELY LEGAL.

The icing on the cake of my concern was when Congress couldn't get it together to do a f'g thing in the wake of that Sandy Hook slaughter. Talk about days of infamy.

No lobby for any industry should be allowed to buy such political power. Yet there we were, and here we still are because the NRA are still doing it, even in the face of myriad investigations of their finances, charges of abuse of their charitable foundation, tax evasion charges, judges tossing out their bankruptcy pleas as fraudulent attempts to evade regulation, and etc.

In January 2021 the NRA even mailed their usual over the top warnings about "armed government agents storming your house, taking your guns, and hauling you off to prison" -- and to top that off, in an appeal for donations, bragged that “only the NRA has the strength to win knock-down brawls on Capitol Hill.

I don't have a problem with civilians owning guns for self defense or hunting. Those gun owners don't need AR-15 style weapons or high capacity ammo-feed either. I have a problem with lax enforcement and with some law enforcement officers deciding which "gun control" laws they'll bother to observe or enforce.

It's time for voters to challenge the braggart NRA by making it clear to elected officials at state and federal levels that accepting donations from the gun lobby in exchange for lax regulation of weaponry and ammunition options is well beyond the pale. And time to quit winking at gun acquisition and ownership law loopholes that one could still fly a cargo plane though. The cost to innocent life of a failure to regulate properly has always been too high, and the cost of reasonable regulation to honest hunters and home or self defenders all too often (and luridly) exaggerated.
 

Yoused

up
Posts
5,614
Reaction score
8,927
Location
knee deep in the road apples of the 4 horsemen
Seemed to me --and not least right around the time the Sandy Hook school shooting occurred-- that as a nation we had already fallen way short of "well regulated" arms-bearing, never mind how militia might fit into our modern 2A picture. tbh it might seem like there's more self-regulation than formal legal constraints
You understand that that is not what "well regulated" means, right? In the original language, in which it has to be interpreted, a well regulated militia was one that functioned well, in the way that they would say that a well regulated clock kept good time.

Which should mean that gun ownership could come with licensing, the same way that motor vehicles do. But the gundamentalists oppose even that.
 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004
You understand that that is not what "well regulated" means, right? In the original language, in which it has to be interpreted, a well regulated militia was one that functioned well, in the way that they would say that a well regulated clock kept good time.

Which should mean that gun ownership could come with licensing, the same way that motor vehicles do. But the gundamentalists oppose even that.
In the original language, the “arms” one could bear included swords and muskets… not ar-15s.
 
U

User.45

Guest
You understand that that is not what "well regulated" means, right? In the original language, in which it has to be interpreted, a well regulated militia was one that functioned well, in the way that they would say that a well regulated clock kept good time.

Which should mean that gun ownership could come with licensing, the same way that motor vehicles do. But the gundamentalists oppose even that.
In the original language, the “arms” one could bear included swords and muskets… not ar-15s.
I'm sure the Founding Fathers would be proud of metal detectors and school body armors..
 

DT

I am so Smart! S-M-R-T!
Posts
6,405
Reaction score
10,455
Location
Moe's
Main Camera
iPhone
You understand that that is not what "well regulated" means, right? In the original language, in which it has to be interpreted, a well regulated militia was one that functioned well, in the way that they would say that a well regulated clock kept good time.

Which should mean that gun ownership could come with licensing, the same way that motor vehicles do. But the gundamentalists oppose even that.

It goes even further than that, the concept of a militia has a service element and organizational structures overseen by an elected governing body. Militia doesn't mean a couple of fucknuts go out and buy guns and they're now a militia, it's more akin to being in the National Guard and keeping your equipment at home (one of my legal professors said something to this effect, he was a published constitutional scholar). It's a very specific use case for ownership.
 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004
It goes even further than that, the concept of a militia has a service element and organizational structures overseen by an elected governing body. Militia doesn't mean a couple of fucknuts go out and buy guns and they're now a militia, it's more akin to being in the National Guard and keeping your equipment at home (one of my legal professors said something to this effect, he was a published constitutional scholar). It's a very specific use case for ownership.
I agree with this 100% - the current 2nd amendment interpretation is NOT ”originalist” in any way, shape, or form. The right-wingers on the court are straight-up lying on that and they know it. They know that history as well as (probably better than) anhbody.
 
U

User.45

Guest
What form of public education, accessible to whom, was envisioned by the founding fathers?
Well, schools existed then too, and I suspect their parents too envisioned their children not to be massacred in school. It's just human nature, I guess.
 
U

User.45

Guest
I agree with this 100% - the current 2nd amendment interpretation is NOT ”originalist” in any way, shape, or form. The right-wingers on the court are straight-up lying on that and they know it. They know that history as well as (probably better than) anhbody.
There's a definite pattern that I've seen all over: 🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗 from 2A advocates when the actual 2nd Amendment is discussed.
The funny thing is, I really want to understand how they actually interpret the text, because I, on my own, just not seeing what they are seeing.
 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004
There's a definite pattern that I've seen all over: 🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗 from 2A advocates when the actual 2nd Amendment is discussed.
The funny thing is, I really want to understand how they actually interpret the text, because I, on my own, just not seeing what they are seeing.
I enjoyed this article from the History channel about the amendment. There’s little indication it was ever meant to be interpreted the way it is today.

 

lizkat

Watching March roll out real winter
Posts
7,341
Reaction score
15,163
Location
Catskill Mountains
I like THIS idea of something different in the realm of takes on the "pro-life" movement. December 14th is the anniversary of the Sandy Hook slaughter in 2012 of 20 first graders and their six teachers / administrators.​

a different take on pro-life ideals.jpg
 

Chew Toy McCoy

Pleb
Site Donor
Posts
7,551
Reaction score
11,801
a whole lot of gun owners are just going to be brown shirts for fascism, rather than some bulwark for freedom. They say they're there to fight for freedom, but so did the Chinese Communist party when it took over Tibet.

I read an article earlier talking about how the Democrat party used to be the party of freedom, saying it directly, and in understanding that living as a wage slave with housing instability means you’re not free and making a living also meant it also allowed you something to live for. Just paying your bills isn’t freedom or something you live for. The target was the oligarchs supported by Republicans that caused the Great Depression.

In that context I don’t know what these gun nuts think they are doing, that we’re going to reach the point that when it comes time to pay their rent or mortgage they’re going to show up, have a shootout, and if they don’t die than consider it paid for that month? Freedom!?
 

hulugu

Site Champ
Posts
461
Reaction score
1,401
Location
the wilds
I read an article earlier talking about how the Democrat party used to be the party of freedom, saying it directly, and in understanding that living as a wage slave with housing instability means you’re not free and making a living also meant it also allowed you something to live for. Just paying your bills isn’t freedom or something you live for. The target was the oligarchs supported by Republicans that caused the Great Depression.

In that context I don’t know what these gun nuts think they are doing, that we’re going to reach the point that when it comes time to pay their rent or mortgage they’re going to show up, have a shootout, and if they don’t die than consider it paid for that month? Freedom!?

Yeah, It's important to note that most of the people with large numbers of shiny-new AR-15s are relatively wealthy, and not the supposed members of the middle class. They're well-off right now.

However, assuming a massive economic down-turn, maybe they could sell these weapons off. But considering that the market is probably saturated, I expect that a whole lot of people end up selling these for pennies on the dollar to cover the mortgage.

I also don't see many of these people pulling a Dillinger, or a Manhattan Savings and Loan bank job, and robbing a bank to save the mortgage. Mostly, I expect a rash of suicides and murder-suicides as these gun nuts decide to kill their own starving family and themselves.

It goes back to my whole problem with the zombie apocalypse, SHTF, prepper world. Like there are good reasons to have an earthquake kit or some supplies. But, people are investing real money in the idea that society will collapse, rather than trying to keep society from collapsing in the first place. And, gun nuts are largely dangerous freaks in a disaster, when what people really need are generators, field kitchens, and chainsaws.

Having been to a lot of places where shit hit the fan, I've yet to see armed roving patrols do a lick of good compared to the one person who has a good medical kit with some field dressings, Advil and antibiotics. Mostly, these guys get in the way, try to "control" the situation with force, and when things get really bad, start acting as armed gangs.
 

Chew Toy McCoy

Pleb
Site Donor
Posts
7,551
Reaction score
11,801

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004

As Stalin said "One child accidentally shooting themselves or others is a tragedy. Thousands of children doing it is American."
These stories are a regular occurrence, and still people think “It’s a good idea to have unlocked firearms around the house.” Oh well, it’s been obvious since Sandy Hook that many Americans love their guns more than their kids. What a shame…
 

Chew Toy McCoy

Pleb
Site Donor
Posts
7,551
Reaction score
11,801
These stories are a regular occurrence, and still people think “It’s a good idea to have unlocked firearms around the house.” Oh well, it’s been obvious since Sandy Hook that many Americans love their guns more than their kids. What a shame…

I think it's safe to assume that there are patriots out there who feel one citizen killed by one illegal is one way too many. But in these near-daily or weekly situations it's all "let's not jump to conclusions".
 
Top Bottom
1 2