I've always gone with Diet Republican because just like Diet Pop versus Regular Pop, neither are good for you but Slow Lane Republicans is also a fair description.
School shooting at Texas Elementary school, several children reported dead
- Thread starter SilentPony
- Start date
GOP lawmakers pass bill allowing for armed teachers; DeWine signals support • Ohio Capital Journal
Republican state lawmakers sent a bill to Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine on Wednesday that empowers local boards of education to allow teachers to carry a gun in the classroom.
ohiocapitaljournal.com
Cowabunga it is then
- Feb 13, 2009
- 178
- 41
- 33
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Does it really matter?
So based on reading I have done elsewhere suggestions to stop mass shootings in schools comes down to armed guards at entrances, arming teachers and support staff, and limiting the number of entry and exit point (because fuck fire safety/evacuation procedures).
There is another name for an institute like that but it is escaping me right now.
There is another name for an institute like that but it is escaping me right now.
Wouldn't be a bad idea to have guards in lookout towers either. Say...one at each corner of the property. And to make sure shooters can't enter classrooms, better make the doors magnetically locked. And maybe all the kids can wear a bright color, so police can easily identify them. Orange maybe? Like all the kids wear bright orange clothes.
Yeah...yeah this could really work. Why hasn't anyone thought of this before?!
Not what he's going for there. He's not talking about amending the constitution. He's talking about ignoring it and justifying it by saying that constitutional rights are not absolute. Under no circumstances is that a good thing for the POTUS to be saying.
These are all risks that the rest of society must bear so that I can continue to live out my cowboy fantasy.
Making me wear a mask during a pandemic means that the country has become a prison! But literally sealing our children into a building is perfectly fine.
Constitutional rights are not absolute. Limitations are already accepted on every one of them.
That really is all it boils down to. Looking cool. AR and a tactical vest don't mean shit against a drone strike. Expanded round magazines aren't going to overthrow the Navy SEALS.
Its all about looking like a man. Looking cool. The price of looking cool, not being cool mind, just looking cool, is a school shooting every 5 months.
Which is something only ever said when we get to this particular right, or whenever someone disagrees with them. Never hear this shit when it's the 4th, 5th, 14th, 15th, or 19th.
It's a fucking sham. Have that potato go say the same shit to a majority black crowd regarding the 14th and 15th.
Last edited:
There are limitations to the First Amendment. Try shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater just for shits and giggles.
Yeah, I already knew where this was going. I'm just going to leave this here and eject because it's clear that nobody actually cares about our rights.
It’s Time to Stop Using the ‘Fire in a Crowded Theater’ Quote
Oliver Wendell Holmes made the analogy during a controversial Supreme Court case that was overturned more than 40 years ago.
www.theatlantic.com
Okay, so, you know your Second Amendment rights are already restricted, right? Or do you own a 20mm flak cannon?
Which is a load of bullshit that concerned persons are working to correct. That, and I don't personally own one, but it's not like you can't privately own things like that. Aight, now I'm dipping.
I've been quite consistent in my view that it's arbitrary and ridiculous to decide whether or not a policy/law is acceptable or not on the basis of whether its reflected in a document from 200 years ago. The provisions of the 14th and 15th Amendments are right because they're moral and necessary, not merely because they're constitutional.
Last edited:
So to you the right to own and brandish a weapon is morally indistinguishable from those others?
If your country is so hellbent on keeping the guns and refusing to acknowledge that what constitutes a firearm has clearly outstripped the collective ability of people to show them due respect, perhaps it’s time to dust off another old idea.Yeah, I already knew where this was going. I'm just going to leave this here and eject because it's clear that nobody actually cares about our rights.
Just wondering how long it'll be until we decide this about women voting or slavery, or how far the government can stick it's hand up our ass at a whim.It’s Time to Stop Using the ‘Fire in a Crowded Theater’ Quote
Oliver Wendell Holmes made the analogy during a controversial Supreme Court case that was overturned more than 40 years ago.
National Service. At age 18, every able bodied person goes through a period of 24 months where they act as military reservists but are employed by industry: anyone in the various engineering corps can be put to work at construction sites, medical corps can become auxiliary nurses or medical assistants in hospitals, nursing homes, medical clinics etc, communications techs can hit their relevant industries. After that they’re released from their service with two years hands on experience and additional education in almost any field you care to name. And of course each one of them is now familiar with the handling of firearms.
Think of it as being like the Turians in Mass Effect, to use a situational example.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,759
- 3,334
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
The problem with the assault weapon laws that used to be on the books (or still are on the books in places like California) is that they were made by people who don't know anything about guns and made no fucking sense.
They classified what is or isn't an assault weapon by visual characteristics and features that don't matter or don't actually make a gun more or less dangerous.
Things like a bayonet lug. Who the fuck cares if your gun has a bayonet lug? When has there ever been a mass bayoneting? There's also more ways to mount a bayonet than having a dedicated bayonet lug. Or a pistol grip. How exactly does that make a rifle more dangerous? It's literally just a comfort feature. Telescoping stock? Same thing, it's for comfort so you can appropriately size the rifle to your own body.
Something like a Ruger Mini 14 is exactly as capable and dangerous a firearm as an AR15, but an AR15 would be considered an assault weapon the Ruger wouldn't.
The 2nd Amendment is defence policy. The people who wrote it were attempting to ensure that the defence of the United States would remain in the hands of civilian militias, due to their distrust of standing armies. That didn't happen. The federal government quickly realised that a standing army would be much more effective at fighting the natives during the westward expansion. In the following centuries, the face of warfare changed significantly. We are now in the era of combined arms warfare, with artillery arguably being the star. The circumstances under which the 2nd Amendment was written are long gone. It is now publicly championed by people wish to use firearms as personal protection, or as a means to fight the federal government. Privately, it is beloved by those with extreme ideologies which encourage them to perform acts of violence.