Found a real elitist hunter.
School/Mass shootings what's the answer?
- Thread starter Lawnboy
- Start date
Found a real elitist hunter.
Ttannahill14
Active member
We must have been in the same class... literally the same thing happened! HAHA
VAspeedgoat
Well-known member
To successfuly over throw a government using militia and small arms isn't even a threat but a nuisance. It has to be in conjunction with at least a portion of the existing military. The Roman empire saw this happen often. Our own revolution was in no small part due to the fact whe had many former officers in the British army to train and organize our army. Our militia was a joke. Also, had we not captured cannons early, and had the French intervene it would have failed quickly. Jim Bob with a hundred round clip won't accomplish anything.
Not advocating a ban of any type but I have a pet peave about historical facts
Not advocating a ban of any type but I have a pet peave about historical facts
I don’t quarrel in skinny jeans.
Interesting analogy. Are you suggesting anyone with an AR must be licensed by the state and adhere to any/all Federal and State legislation about how they are operated?
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I think if you look at the historical context on the 2nd amendment the idea was that the federal government shouldn't have a monopoly of military power, that their would be state and/or local militias. I think a modern example of this type of militia would be the organization of the Swiss military where soldiers keep all their personal equipment, including the weapons personally assigned to them at home. Tanks, Aircraft, etc. are not assigned to a single individual and are therefore not kept and maintained individually... plus you know the cost/space 
Personally my interpretation, which no one probably cares about, is that the "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" piece is informing the second part "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed", and therefore if one is part of a well regulated militia (so not a bunch of dudes who just decide they want to do militaryesk training, where camo, and own guns) that individual as a militia member cannot have their right to arms infringed.
If the modern interpretation of the 2nd was in fact correct why wouldn't it just read..."The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
All that aside the constitution is a living document and we as a society want to make changes we can.
Some interesting data points here, not sure if I agree with all of the conclusions.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/06/opinion/how-to-reduce-shootings.html?smid=fb-share
Personally my interpretation, which no one probably cares about, is that the "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" piece is informing the second part "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed", and therefore if one is part of a well regulated militia (so not a bunch of dudes who just decide they want to do militaryesk training, where camo, and own guns) that individual as a militia member cannot have their right to arms infringed.
If the modern interpretation of the 2nd was in fact correct why wouldn't it just read..."The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
All that aside the constitution is a living document and we as a society want to make changes we can.
Some interesting data points here, not sure if I agree with all of the conclusions.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/06/opinion/how-to-reduce-shootings.html?smid=fb-share
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I just read an interesting idea. What if gun owners were required to have gun insurance to cover any damages done but that weapon? Pricing would be less for a single shot 12-ga and more for an AR. Much like we have for a car. I haven't had enough time to chew of the idea yet, see how it tastes, but I'm intrigued.
Tradewind
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2015
- Messages
- 4,665
As people who own and use firearms we tend to break the equation down to who and how well can they defend against certain types of weapons, assuming that everyone is an expert shooter.
I don't think tht necessarily needs to be the case. Only for the public to know that there are armed individuals in the school building who are trained to handle and stop school shooting incidents.
If you know you will be contested and potentially die before you even get started might be enough in some cases.
The best solution to one of these would be for the shooter to get shot dead at the school entrance and then paste that on the news cycle.
I know most guns involved in these mass shootings were acquired legally. But I think it is naive to think that a person who goes to all these lengths (planning, building, research, training, etc....) won't take the one extra step to obtain an "illegal" weapon.
Question for you......what percentage of all gun murders are committed with legally obtained guns .... and GO!
agreed. It seems like one thought is that giving a teacher a handgun will solve the problem. I think this is a false sense of security.
npaden
Well-known member
There is no doubt that this is a terrible problem and very complex.
As more states pass laws allowing teachers to carry it will be interesting to see if it seems to make a difference in those states.
I believe there are 9 states that allow teachers (and college students in some states) to carry if they are licensed for concealed carry.
I do believe that a potential shooter knowing there is a possibility of someone else having a gun is about as important as whether or not they could make a big difference in a true situation.
As more states pass laws allowing teachers to carry it will be interesting to see if it seems to make a difference in those states.
I believe there are 9 states that allow teachers (and college students in some states) to carry if they are licensed for concealed carry.
I do believe that a potential shooter knowing there is a possibility of someone else having a gun is about as important as whether or not they could make a big difference in a true situation.
I'm pretty sure that would generate a lot of law suits.
Ttannahill14
Active member
I sell insurance for a living and i LOVE this idea! ha
mrcowboy
Well-known member
VikingsGuy,
I completely agree with your statement concerning gun range activities and the lunatics that go there. Many times in the last several years I have packed up my stuff and left the gun range. I was not feeling safe even though I had several firearms with me. Peoples behavior with guns and their lack of safety protocol at ranges is very disturbing.
I completely agree with your statement concerning gun range activities and the lunatics that go there. Many times in the last several years I have packed up my stuff and left the gun range. I was not feeling safe even though I had several firearms with me. Peoples behavior with guns and their lack of safety protocol at ranges is very disturbing.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Interesting comments, trying to read thru and catch up...
I know it's wishful thinking but damn I'd like to see media outlets quit trying to top each other with editorializing and gore/violence pimping. But, as mentioned, that takes us back to freedoms.
I know it's wishful thinking but damn I'd like to see media outlets quit trying to top each other with editorializing and gore/violence pimping. But, as mentioned, that takes us back to freedoms.
Tradewind
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2015
- Messages
- 4,665
Not sure who should be armed at a school. But I like the idea of someone not necessarily being tied to a classroom.
I want to say last I read was 3% or something tiny.
So that means most are committed by illegal guns, I am very aware of that fact. I would counter that with if my guns each cost me a couple/few thousand dollars, they certainly wouldn't spend the night in the truck (locked or not), they would hardly spend any time outside the safe at all while not under my control. I think this would result in less gun thefts. There goes one method of acquisition.
Having worked in a firearm store 20 minutes outside Milwaukee, we had a few straw purchases come through for handguns and rifles alike. Now if you make that purchase a few thousand dollars and include a mental health specialist, I don't think these girls would be out buying for their boyfriends (the common scenario we would deal with.) It just isn't worth their time. That takes another method of acquisition out.
Last edited:
dannyb278
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 571
I suggest everyone read this book. its fascinating. While I don't put as much stock into "The video games/music/movies made me do it" these events do point to a cultural " desenthesization" of some kind, specifically middle class, white males.
https://www.amazon.com/Killing-Psyc...TF8&qid=1518730521&sr=8-1&keywords=on+killing
https://www.amazon.com/Killing-Psyc...TF8&qid=1518730521&sr=8-1&keywords=on+killing
F
fwagner
Guest
This is a correct statement, freedom doesn't just include freedom to do good but the freedom to do bad. First off, if anyone on this thread thinks that ONE aspect of this multi-layered problem is the "root cause" they are a fool and not worth your time reading their comments. Guns aren't the only problem but its obviously part of it, mental health isn't the only problem but it's part of it, the breakdown of society isn't the only problem but it's part of it. This problem needs to be addressed from several different angles, and yes that includes gun reform laws. Because I think it is matters in these discussions i'll tell you where I stand politically. I'm very left leaning socially, fiscally in the middle or slightly right and I'm a gun owner. I have fired many LAR's, favorite being Rock River Arms LAR .223 Fred Eichler edition. I don't think banning guns is the way to go, even if they did it, banning would cause more problems then solutions in my opinion. I think we need to expand the list of things a person can do that would not allow them to ever purchase a gun. For example....
Things that would eliminate you from ever owning any firearm:
1. Being expelled from a school
2. Being dishonorably discharged from the military
3. More than 2 OUI/DUI's
4. ANY assault charge....I don't care if you got drunk in a bar and got in a fight, grow the f up
5. Any poaching violation
6. Any theft conviction
7. More then 2 violations resulting in jail time
.......
Similar threads
