Active Shooter Killed At Nashville School

[GroverCleveland]

I applied this thing, foreign to some but useful to others, called common sense.

Good Lord, I should by a lottery ticket.

 

[GroverCleveland]

We realize there were multiple drafts of that famous amendment. Right?

Oh yes, and various state constitutions have different renderings as well. but isn't what matters is the one that was ratified?

 

[utvolpj]

It's amazing that someone would think the men of the revolution would want a govt agency to control their access to weapons. Context clues help

 

[hog88]

Nope, to the contrary. The basis of my argument was that it is ridiculous that there is almost no ability to legally prevent mentally incompetent individuals from possessing weapons - the definitions are narrow and the ability to enforce is almost non existent...

So your solution is to restrict the rights of the mentally competent?

 

[GroverCleveland]

Yes, that is one excellent piece of legislation.

Not completely. It banned the purchase of new machine guns. I have always wanted an MP-5.

 

[luthervol]

She couldn't access anymore children than she did so how would her having an automatic weapon resulted in more casualties?

Not true. There were others in the open area who were able to get to a secure area before being mowed down.

And then move on the other recent school shootings.
But, if you want to take the stance that school shootings would be no worse if the shooter was armed with a fully automatic, go ahead and make that stance clear. Because then everyone will know you are full of it.

 

[BabyvoI]

So your solution is to restrict the rights of the mentally competent?

Not once did I infer that.

 

[85SugarVol]

Oh yes, and various state constitutions have different renderings as well. but isn't what matters is the one that was ratified?

Yes. What matters is what made it in the BoR.

But we’re discussing context and frame of mind - which makes the prior drafts relevant imo.

 

[hog88]

Not once did I infer that.

Then forgive me. I thought I saw a post from you advocating the ban of high capacity magazines. Must have you confused with someone else.

 

[85SugarVol]

Not true. There were others in the open area who were able to get to a secure area before being mowed down.

And then move on the other recent school shootings.
But, if you want to take the stance that school shootings would be no worse if the shooter was armed with a fully automatic, go ahead and make that stance clear. Because then everyone will know you are full of it.

That girl probably would have hit fewer people leveling a fully automatic weapon.

 

[GroverCleveland]

Yes. What matters is what made it in the BoR.

But we’re discussing context and frame of mind - which makes the prior drafts relevant imo.

I agree with that. Why were those rejected and this the one ultimately settled on, rght?

 

[LadyVolette]

It's amazing that someone would think the men of the revolution would want a govt agency to control their access to weapons. Context clues help

Why are we agreeing? This is scary lol

 

[luthervol]

The local officials were us, members of our communities. The state officials selected to lead were men the local militias would have known of and followed.

The most important part in all of this you avoid is that the militias arms were supplied by the people. They brought what they had from home, even up to the Civil War this was common practice.

Which perfectly highlights that 1776 and 2023 are vastly different. That's where original intent factors in.

 

[85SugarVol]

I agree with that. Why were those rejected and this the one ultimately settled on, rght?

I don’t know.

But other versions illustrate that the second portion is not contingent on the first portion - as ratified.

 

[JOEY’S ALL VOL !!!]

I applied this thing, foreign to some but useful to others, called common sense.

That’s where you shortchanged yourself.

 

[BabyvoI]

Then forgive me. I thought I saw a post from you advocating the ban of high capacity magazines. Must have you confused with someone else.

Not an argument I've made

 

[hog88]

Yes. What matters is what made it in the BoR.

But we’re discussing context and frame of mind - which makes the prior drafts relevant imo.

Here is Madison's first (and only other draft I can find) of the 2A, it clearly gives the people the right to bear arms.

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, a well-armed and well-regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.”

 

[KB5252]

Nope, to the contrary. The basis of my argument was that it is ridiculous that there is almost no ability to legally prevent mentally incompetent individuals from possessing weapons - the definitions are narrow and the ability to enforce is almost non existent...

It's complicated, think about people who've been found guilty of murder who are mentally ill. Many of them can't stand trial until they are medicated and found competent. Fast forward to many years later, they are released because they have been taking their medication under supervision.

We know what evil they are capable of but trust that they'll continue taking their meds and release them.

I say all of that to say this. If we apply those same standards are we really accomplishing anything? Where do you draw lines, how do you enforce it? At what point does the public's need outweigh the right to privacy?

Perhaps people who are mentally unstable without meds should be required to test weekly or twice monthly to make sure they have the expected amount of said medication in their system...... Just an idea.

 

[luthervol]

That girl probably would have hit fewer people leveling a fully automatic weapon.

Luckily, we'll never know.

 

[KB5252]

Which perfectly highlights that 1776 and 2023 are vastly different. That's where original intent factors in.

Which you completely ignore, that the intent was to allow the public to possess arms independent of their service to militias.

 

[85SugarVol]

Luckily, we'll never know.

Those that understand firearms do

 

[RikidyBones]

Which perfectly highlights that 1776 and 2023 are vastly different. That's where original intent factors in.

They were good with cannons being onboard private ships. Intent was that it was timeless.

 

[BabyvoI]

It's complicated, think about people shove been found guilty of murder who are mentally ill. Many of them can't stand trial until they are medicated and found competent. Fast forward to many years later, they are released because they have been taken their medication under supervision.

We know what evil they are capable of but trust that they'll continue taking their meds and release them.

I say all of that to say this. If we apply those same standards are we really accomplishing anything? Where do you draw lines, how do you enforce it? At what point does the public's need outweigh the right to privacy?

Perhaps people who are mentally unstable without meds should be required to test weekly or twice monthly to make sure they have the expected amount of said medication in their system...... Just an idea.

It's definitely complicated. I don't have any answers but just feel strongly that something more than nothing needs to happen. We have elected people who have a responsibility to evaluate the facts and act - and have the resources to engage experts that can make educated proposals. The problem is that they continue to do nothing either due to laziness, extreme partisanship or are beholden to special interest.

 

[AirVol]

I'm not sure how myself or anyone who identifies as trans is obligated to say anything.

I mean, I know why you think that. It's a combination of an IQ that hovers around our basketvols' average PPG and your aversion to anything that isn't white and Christian.

Of course. Now go take your hormones and chase it down with Tabasco if you’re man enough.

 

[82_VOL_83]

I'm with you. Apparently AirBall needs validation and reassurance.

I have to sit through training classes where I work and everytime I hear someone say they feel like they have to lead with their orientation I ask myself why? I don't care, you aren't here to be gay or trans, you are here to do a job and as long as you do that effectively, what you do elsewhere makes no difference.

/rant