On another note about this school shooting, I see students that are too young to vote are walking out of schools across the country in protest. Good for them!

From what I can see, most present day 'Texans' were on the other side at the Alamo!

///

Women fight alongside men in the Israel Army and as Top Gun pilots in the US Air Farce.
........The idea of women being allowed to own guns and NOT men was more of a hypothetical thought experiment than any suggestion of reality. The only important idea was that from a STATISTICAL standpoint women are involved in almost zero mass murders as compared to men ( and adrenaline-fueled YOUNG men mostly).
.........I found the idea interesting (even though not practical) because my opinion of the main cause of US mass murders is based on STATISTICAL comparisons of all countries in the world. Which leads to easy GUN availability being said cause.

I agree it is at least A cause. Whether it is the root cause, I don't know. I think the root cause is more like cultural. Where we used to have a thriving middle class, and people (my parents and grand parents) were obsessed with working hard so I could have a better life than they did. There was a sense of manifest destiny and it seemed even politicians worked together and worked out their disagreements.

Somewhere along the way, we lost our dream. Making money became the preferred religion and everyone was "out for themselves. From there we have just spiraled downhill. I think the violence is just frustration and anger expressing itself.

We began our long list of "wars" - war on drugs, war on poverty, war on whatever the current thing someone wants to pour our tax dollars into and the only qualification was you had to guarantee to need MORE money if you want to get the grant.

Beto O'rourke just asked the right questions. Because the Texas governor was avoiding talking about ease of GUN availability. It was supposed to be a problem-solving address and citizen meeting.

I see, if you can't find it, then it's false?

Show me where in the Constitution it "BANS" religion from the government. Maybe you read it differently? It "bans" the establishment of a gov based religion or the free exercise of it. Guess someone missed the part where Congress starts their session with a prayer. But, that don't count, right?

It is not the Constitution that bans religion from anything. It was uncomfortable powers that be that continue to ban religion from everything. Not going any further because I do not wish to have my "thoughts" misconstrued and get punished on here.

Beto was totally out of line.

whoops, sorry, that got too political fast. I had to remove it.
////
I agree.

OK then, why are we not allowed M50 machine gun? It's just another method of killing.

Sad

I have no idea what you mean by, "if you can't find it is must be false." I didn't say I couldn't find anything, I said I wasn't going to bother finding it, since it has been proven false so many times - even a couple posts in this thread.

Wrong, it bans the establishment of a preferred religion. Someone must have read it wrong. And yes, there are people like me that lobby for the opening pray to be discontinued. Since I don't recall any Jewish Rabi, or Muslims ever holding the office of Senate Chaplin, hence the use of "Christian" Chaplins is enduring a specific religion.

Very true. But if no gun, no shooting, no killing at least not as many nor as fast.

You think so small - why not an M1 Abrams. (sarcasm/joke)

The Argument that the 2nd amendment is intended to allow citizens to take back a rogue government would require that the citizens be as well equipped as the government.

And no where does the constitution list any limitations on the weapons we are Allowed to have, so according to the recent SCOTUS leaked decision on abortions not being as an enumerated right - so it isn't covered, I can only assume ANYTHING not mentioned in the constitution is not covered.

I want my M1 Abrams NOW. and I think I will take a few Cruise missiles to go along with it.

Yes you can not stop all the killings but why do we make it so easy to kill so many so fast?

Sad

Interesting that cities with the strictest of gun control laws, have the highest violations. But, that has been repeated consistently and there is always an excuse. We can't stop the use of drugs, so let's make them legal. Easier that way. So, stopping the sale of guns and banning them will miraculously make them go away. I think that only works with good, law abiding citizens, not the bad guy.

No one considers the fact that banning guns, just increases more crime. If you can't purchase a gun, then someone will "print" one out. Guess what? No serial number for tracking.

Heaven help us if someone actually suggested enforcing existing laws and THEN executing those penalties associated with said violations. But no, we can't have these fine young individuals sitting in jail. It might hurt their self esteem.

You will always have evil and you will always have violence. Even deterrents won't stop that fact. It may keep the lesser focused upon evil from committing to their nefarious ways, but you will always have mentally disturbed that will slip through the system. It's a shame, but it will always happen. And don't bother telling me that other countries don't have crime. They all do. Some focus on punishment or treatment. Ever been to a place of confinement in Turkey? You do not want to be confined there. Want to visit the jails of Mexico? Not quite the holiday of choice.

A gun ban only makes criminals of decent citizens. Buy back all the guns you want, but I bet you won't see one AR-15, Kimble pistol or any other expensive guns in the buy back bin.

Good luck on your gun free country fantasy, folks.

Sad that there is no good answer to this other than better protection of our children.

No, you said that since you couldn't prove (or wouldn't prove me wrong) on the founding fathers being Christian than you consider it false.

And I think you had better go back and read the First Amendment over. It says nothing of "preferred."

Okay, so around and around - please show ANY post by ANYONE in this 30+ page thread that is pushing banning all guns. ANYONE.

You keep repeating that.

I see people asking for suggestions.
I see people suggesting some restrictions.
I see some people wanting to ban some types of guns.

So, I will check back to see the post number that you can provide that someone said the only solution, the desired solution, or the suggested SOLUTION is to ban all guns.

I absolutely agree with your observation. Only problem is that your observation is applicable to most of other developed countries and they don't have same mass shooting problem like us. What don't they have? GUNS..

SAD

And how many times mass murdering by car happened?

SAD

Shooting deer and shooting watermelons or punching holes in paper are all OK gun activities with me. And protecting your home and castle. I draw the line at mass murder of human beings with GUNS designed mainly to kill human beings. Those guns are low recoil, 22 caliber, high velocity, high magazine capacity, and military-style rifles.
.......Government tyranny can best be prevented by votes, not bullets. And if that need ever EVEN happened, it could be stopped just as well with bolt action and single-shot rifles.
.........Australia and New Zealand will NOT FALL to government tyranny just because they don't want semi-automatics in the hands of civilians.

Good luck defending yourself against F-35 with laser guided missiles..

SAD

I know of one. But my post was sarcastic. With the intention that it would prove difficult to get the car into the school hallway to then somehow get it into the class. But, I am sure the mentally ill people will find a way, just because...

The we are not like Australia, Sweden, and etc.........that part sounds like some kind of "American Exceptionalism" rant to me. All those countries mentioned have stronger middle classes than the US does today. We have the largest wealth disparity of all the 1st world countries. I guess that is some sort of "American Exceptionalism".
........And the US economic realities lead to social dysfunction and even to such extremes of Mass Murder - because there is little money set aside for mental health and other social programs as in other countries. Texas recently lowered their budget for mental health. Is Texas actively trying to produce MORE mass murderers?

Agreed.

Don't you buy any insurance? Don't you stop at STOP sign? COVID vaccine?

SAD

I remember about 10 years back, a lot of women taking Karate Classes - many because husbands or boyfriends had physically threatened them. Many became very proficient. I am 100% for anything that brings women up to full equality status with men. And in many countries, there are laws that women must be paid equally as men doing the same job.
.........Women taking gun proficiency and safety classes are a good thing. I would be OK with a government program to pay for such training. Equal power should increase social stability. Women should not have to feel preyed upon in any situation.

Agreed! Kudos!

Sorry, we don't have MORE FREEDOM than Australia, Sweden, or many other countries. In fact, we have the world's GREATEST wealth disparity. It's OK to be proud of your country and love your country. But, it is also good to be realistic and note the country's warts, problems, and weaknesses.

Clip.....magazine ..........Potato Pa tah to......big deal. I know the technical difference. But clip and magazine are basically interchangeable terms to the average person. Plus clip is quicker to type.
..........People should try and focus in on the main point of a post - not try to point out minor flaws.

Sometimes our leaders??? Need to be questioned!!!!!

I believe I said "wouldn't" and followed in the same post with because it has already been proven/answered many times. So, if you wanted to prove itI would be open to looking at your proof, but as far I I was concerned credible sources had already adequately answer the question and I was not going to waste my time research yet another of your claims.

I think it's important to look at our history prior to 1787 and what led up to the writing of the Constitution. Arguably the path was set with the Stamp Act of 1765, converging in Concord and Lexington in 1775 as the British moved to disarm Americans. Our Revolutionary War lasted 8 years and they were very hard desperate years. As Patrick Henry famously said, "I know not what path others may take, but for me, give me Liberty or give me Death.". That sentence sums up our quest for Independence and self-determination. John Dickinson's name has been lost to history for most Americans, but his importance for his time can't be understated. He wrote the grievances to King George, which are delineated in our Declaration of Independence, as well as the Articles of Confederation. But, after eight years of governing this new nation under the Articles it was clear it didn't work and needed to be fixed.

In 1787, 12 of the 13 states sent delegates to Philadelphia with one directive, fix the Articles. It was clear they were not authorized to do anything else. The debates ensued and it didn't take long for them to recognize that the Articles were not salvageable. The debates continued and they drafted the Constitution. Individual citizens Rights were not included.

I think the heart of the matter, when it comes to the Bill of Rights, comes to Federalism versus Anti-Federalism. I can really appreciate that they were able to work together to create our Freedom documents. I think we can all understand that surviving eight years of war with the most powerful government and most powerful military of their time might leave them resistant to create another government that might oppress them some day (Anti-Federalists). We can also understand the need of having a strong government and global presence (Federalists). The leading Federalists, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, John Adams and more did not want a Bill of Rights. Anti-Federalists, Patrick Henry, Daniel Webster, Thomas Jefferson, did not want a strong central government and fought for a Bill of Rights to be included.

It is not difficult to get into the hearts and minds of our Founding Fathers. So much of it is documented. James Madison knew they were doing historic work and transcribed all of their debates. They can be read in a bound book that is 600 type written pages. There are other books on the debates. We have the writings of John Dickinson, Joseph Story, Daniel Webster and so many more. Between 1776 and 1826, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson wrote 1,250 letters to each other. Today that is three volumes.

Knowing that their government sought to disarm them; knowing that they fought eight long years against their government for Independence from oppressive government agendas; and knowing that absolute power corrupts absolutely, I understand the need to enshrine certain Rights with the goal of never having the same oppression. It was required that all 13 states ratify the new Constitution and it took 10 of 13 to pass the Amendments. The Framers heard the message loud and clear that it would not get ratified if the Individual Rights were not included. Madison presented 19 Amendment to the House, to appease the Anti-Federalists. The House presented 17 Amendments to the Senate who paired them down to 12, rewriting some before sending them to the states. The States approved 10 of the Amendments which became our Bill of Rights. One of the Amendments that allowed Congress to give themselves a raise remained unpassed until 1992 when it became our 27th Amendment.

So, I totally understand the very important need to keep and bear arms from the perspective of our Founding Fathers if only for the need to once again face off with an oppressive government. Having arms for the purpose of hunting and self-defense would not even have been a debate or conversation in 1787, it would have been a given, as simply common sense. As I've mentioned, I have nearly 70 books in my library devoted on the Constitution. Personally, I think I am in between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists.

You don't post here often do you? The number one strategy of people that can't prove their point (that being Carlson's points) is deflection and ignoring the point of the post to focus on minutiae so they can strut around and quibble. They would have a point if the word in question would (or could) cause confusion. But, it is never the case. Clip Magazine, or maybe Assault weapon, the AF15 is NOT an assault weapon. Even though the term assault weapon mean in general parlance a military looking semi-automatic weapon which can be converted to auto with a bump stock. It is technically wrong. and all refrigerators are not frig's and all adjustable spanners are not crest wrenches, and on and on.

I am sure that makes the parents of the 19 tea children feel much better, they right word will now be used to describe what murdered their children.

You are allowed if, you got money and permit. Or you can buy one on blackmarket like cartels. In this world you can get anything as long as you got enough money and connection.

IMO The protection part failed at the school. It’s called complacency.

Finally, can we have a civil conversation on common sense abortion? Before people freak out, nobody is coming for your abortions. We just need to be rational and discuss common sense abortion control. It isn't too much to ask for mandatory background checks with mental health assessment and a nationwide registration list so we know who is having abortions. We need to stop assault abortions occurring after the first trimester and for God's sake, nobody needs high capacity abortions for twins and triplets. One abortion per woman should be plenty because really nobody needs more than one abortion

(*Borrowed from Katie Lamb on TikTok.)

In you’re part of America someone else done all the dirty work so you part don’t have to.

No bears or wolfs cause they been eliminate.

Gee whiz Batwoman! Somehow banana magazine does NOT have the same nice ring to it as BANANA CLIP. And the logic of blaming dems for the recent increase to 400,000 guns in civilian US hands seems a little........shall we say WEAK. There is some other reason for that increase? One religion expert recently tossed out a theory something like.........the religious right-wing uses GUNS as a kind of "virtue signaling". I assume that this lets them find ACCEPTANCE within that religious right. The young man whispers into the fair maiden's ear, "You like GUNS, I like GUNS, let's .........get married and make little right-wing babies"!
.........That is just one theory. I am not sure myself what has caused this recent increase. I need to further ponder that?

What get when start mass prosecution of police officers. Yes, some was warranted but when you tie there hands and then play next day quarter back what it coming to.