« previous   misc   next »

What Second Amendment Rights?


By tovarichpeter   Follow   Tue, 18 Dec 2012, 9:08am PST   5,890 views   93 comments   Watch (2)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike  

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/jeffrey-toobin-second-amendment.html?mbid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true

« First     « Previous     Comments 54-93 of 93     Last »

Ironman   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 5:42am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (3)     Comment 54

robertoaribas says

there was an armed guard at columbine. he exchanged fire with the attackers twice. Notice it didn't stop all the carnage????

The guard actually drove the shooters into the building and then stayed outside waiting for the police to arrive, giving the shooters plenty of time for their rampage inside the school.

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 8:24am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 55

Call it Crazy says

The guard actually drove the shooters into the building and then stayed outside waiting for the police to arrive, giving the shooters plenty of time for their rampage inside the school.

So then it would seem that having armed guards at schools is not an effective way to prevent violence.

Ironman   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 8:37am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (3)     Comment 56

Homeboy says

Call it Crazy says

The guard actually drove the shooters into the building and then stayed outside waiting for the police to arrive, giving the shooters plenty of time for their rampage inside the school.

So then it would seem that having armed guards at schools is not an effective way to prevent violence.

Not when they are sitting OUTSIDE the building eating lunch in their car. I think they work better when stationed INSIDE the school.

deepcgi   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 10:19am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 57

I have no more faith in government than in sociopathic gun owners. One need not return to the 1700's for examples of governmental abuse against its citizens - last week would do nicely. If you wish to only consider the "first" world, then certainly stray no further back than the 1940's. Or do we believe that with the era of WMD's came sanity in governance?

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 3:29pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 58

Call it Crazy says

Not when they are sitting OUTSIDE the building eating lunch in their car. I think they work better when stationed INSIDE the school.

Right. Because it would have been impossible for the guard to walk into the school....

Maybe we could just have guns set up every 10 feet that automatically shoot at you. Or we could find a realistic solution.

deepcgi   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 3:33pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 59

Like 911, Columbine was a sucker punch. You don't leave your back door unlocked after the first break-in.

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 3:58pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 60

I think the problem is that you guys seem to be confusing reality with a Rambo movie.

deepcgi   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 5:12pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 61

Equating the opposing position with a trigger happy mental case is just what I would expect. How many riots occur at football games in the UK as opposed to "football" games in the US? A culture of violence without the culture of guns, huh? I see no evidence of evolution there. Some lame legislation banning assault weapons will save no one. Extreme action like repealing the second amendment will save no one. There is no "legislation" that will have an effect on culture. There are too many humans in too close proximity to one another. Paranoia will likely increase in proportion

deepcgi   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 5:40pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 62

Criticize the glorification of violence. That is the key. And let's not be foolish and expect our governments to hesitate to abuse power. We haven't even declared war and yet the government wages it continuously.

The Soviet government (and our own CIA) thought that it was impossible that the Union could splinter so quickly, since Joe Soviet was powerless in comparison to the Soviet military - just like Joe Six Pack is no match for the US war machine, but just as in the Soviet Union, it turns out that "Joe" staffs the military and wouldn't even consider firing on his own people. The union simply fractured and the overwhelming military might made no difference at all. Money matters more than weapons. Criticize the video games and the Rambo movies rather than the gun owners. The rule of law would be a good idea. Simply upholding existing laws. A deemphasis of nonviolent crime versus violent crime is another good idea. Not going to war unless it is declared is another.

A US Senator was a neighbor of mine on 911. I had the chance to ask him personally if we would be declaring war soon. He told me, "it's very highly unlikely. If we declare war, we let a lot of insurance companies off the hook for reconstruction costs in Manhattan. Sadly that is just the way it is."

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 5:55pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 63

deepcgi says

. How many riots occur at football games in the UK as opposed to "football" games in the US? A culture of violence without the culture of guns, huh? I see no evidence of evolution there.

Now you're finally starting to get it. Around 9,000 gun murders in the U.S. each year. How many in the U.K.? Less than 50. As you say, both countries have a culture of violence. What's the difference? We have guns, and they don't.

To slightly change an oft-used quote: "It's the guns, stupid".

bob2356   befriend   ignore   Sun, 23 Dec 2012, 8:16pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 64

deepcgi says

I'm making a point. If you ban guns, you WILL create a police state. Hoping differently is foolish. You won't be keeping guns out of the next massacre.

So the rest of the first world is a police state? Funny I never noticed when I travelled or lived overseas. The US has just about the least civil rights in the OECD and you don't even know it.

deepcgi   befriend   ignore   Mon, 24 Dec 2012, 2:40am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 65

About 50 homicides per year by guns, but about another 700 to 750 murders by other means. Plus the population of the UK is 6 times smaller than the the US. The number of "murders per million" is HIGHER in the UK. Over 30 percent of the murders were by use of a knife.

Now you're getting it.

As far as the the police state comment is concerned, reread the posts.

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Mon, 24 Dec 2012, 3:02am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 66

deepcgi says

The number of "murders per million" is HIGHER in the UK.

What are you talking about? No it's not. Not even close. The per-capita murder rate is like 4 times higher in the U.S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

bob2356   befriend   ignore   Mon, 24 Dec 2012, 3:46am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 67

Homeboy says

What are you talking about? No it's not. Not even close. The per-capita murder rate is like 4 times higher in the U.S.

Don't confuse ideologues with facts.

I think deepcgi may be on to something. Let's follow his thinking to the logical conclusion. Armed guards at every school is a good start. But wait people have shot up malls. By god, armed guards at the malls then. But wait what about government buildings, been plenty of them shot up. Armed guards are clearly the answer there also. Banks, stores, gas stations, sports arena's. Bring it on. The logical end point is to have armed guards for every place people gather in groups of 2 or more. The TSA is the logical agency to provide them. Think of the benefits to the unemployment rate. Plus the greatest benefit of preventing living in a police state. See, if you just think it through it all becomes clear.

thunderlips11   befriend   ignore   Mon, 24 Dec 2012, 3:55am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 68

There is a huge debate in the UK (whatever apologists say) about the accuracy of the numbers.

The longest standing trick is to report ONLY England and Wales in the "UK" numbers, leaving out Northern Ireland and Scotland, which are more violent areas; Glasgow is the stabbing capital of Europe, and Belfast is also pretty violent.

The UK's murder rate would rise substantially if they were to be included.

The 'official' numbers reported a 20% drop in murder over the past 2 years - which is so great, it should be treated with a great deal of skepticism!

In 2011, the same time the Wales & England murder rate dropped 16%, homicides were up 19% YOY in Scotland! Something does not compute!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-16175439

BTW, in Japan, if some guy flips out and kills his wife and two kids, then himself, it counts as 4 suicides according to their figuring, rather than 1 suicide and 3 murders.

deepcgi   befriend   ignore   Mon, 24 Dec 2012, 7:48am PST   Share   Quote   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 69

Bob2356:

If you outlaw guns, does that mean the government and private security give them up as well? No? Then the guards are armed everywhere. Not my idea to arm anyone but the citizens, that's your idea.

And homeboy is right about UK murders not being higher.... just in Scotland - where if you're the victim of homicide, there is a 63 percent chance you were stabbed. (probably head butted first though - they like that).

Number of people head butted before being murdered anywhere else in the world ...0
In Scotland ... Most.

It's the foreheads, stupid. Outlaw foreheads and we'll reduce the murder rate in Scotland overnight.

deepcgi   befriend   ignore   Mon, 24 Dec 2012, 7:53am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 70

Oh, and a single stab is very rarely fatal. In Scotland, if you're murdered, you are stabbed and stabbed over and over again. Much more civilized than gun violence.

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Mon, 24 Dec 2012, 1:40pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 71

thunderlips11 says

There is a huge debate in the UK (whatever apologists say) about the accuracy of the numbers.

The longest standing trick is to report ONLY England and Wales in the "UK" numbers, leaving out Northern Ireland and Scotland, which are more violent areas; Glasgow is the stabbing capital of Europe, and Belfast is also pretty violent.

The murder rate in Scotland was 2.14 per 100,000. Northern Ireland, 1.52. So even if you count ONLY those places, the rate is far below the U.S. rate of 4.2.

You gun guys really seem to be in denial about what the actual facts are. I guess sometimes you just want something SO BAD, that the truth doesn't matter to you anymore.

bob2356   befriend   ignore   Tue, 25 Dec 2012, 2:30am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 72

deepcgi says

If you outlaw guns, does that mean the government and private security give them up as well? No? Then the guards are armed everywhere. Not my idea to arm anyone but the citizens, that's your idea.

The word of the day is satire. Look it up.

Remind me again how many schools, malls, etc. have been shot up by government (wtf is government, military, police, what?) and private security firms. How many murders a year?

Where did I say we shouldn't arm the citizens? You are assuming that. You know what they say about assume. Allow citizens who are responsible and trained to arm themselves. Although no other country even comes close to gun ownership rates in the US there are plenty with relatively high ownership rates and very low murder rates. How can they do it and not the US? Simple, their requirements to own a gun are higher than having a pulse and a couple hundred bucks.

Why do the gun advocates like you fight so hard to avoid any kind of accountability? Why not have a real back round check on everyone buying a gun, no exceptions? Why not track all guns nationally by serial number. Require a yearly inspection of guns at the local police station to make sure the alleged owner actually has the gun. The vast majority of guns used in crimes come from a handful of states. Have a single standard for gun sales and ownership nationally this problem goes away.

Na, we can't do any of that, there is a god given and constitutional right to individual gun ownership for 235 years. Well actually not true at all. District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 is the first ruling by the supreme court that asserts individual gun rights. But don't let simple facts stand in the way of a good rant.

Bonus points, if everyone is armed they can rise up against an unjust government. What a stupid idea. It happens in countries where the military is very small, totally corrupt, completely incompetent, and most soldiers cut and run at the first shots fired (think Egypt). It isn't going to happen in the US no matter what the NRA members fantasize.

taxee   befriend   ignore   Tue, 25 Dec 2012, 2:32am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 73

The insanity rate is going up. Drop your defenses.

deepcgi   befriend   ignore   Tue, 25 Dec 2012, 1:25pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 74

Bob:

Are you seriously asking in what schools, malls, public places were innocent civilians killed by governments or private organizations?

You see, there is the problem with the gun control lobby...short selective memories. The answer is "the vast majority". You simply leave the world wars out of your calculations and out of your mind.

There is no evidence that with weapons of mass destruction and the Information Age came the end of genocide or massive world war.

I absolutely guarrantee war will return to the first world. America funds the defense of Europe including the UK. If the US pulled its thousands of military bases from Europe, Asia, and down under, borders would fall in short order.

The total carnage created by all lone psychotics with guns is so small compared with the actions of governments that the numbers are forgotten wholesale. They are so huge we don't even consider them.

When I was a kid in the 70's, I thought world war 2 was forever ago. Back when they couldn't even make films in color. Back before television! I know my parents were around, but damn they were old.

Now, however I realize just how short a time that really was. For example, Universal is advertising the 20th anniversary release of Jurassic Park due out in the spring. A number of the freshman college students whom I teach the other day stunned me by not knowing what I was referring to when I used the term "Columbine".

Why? Because those college kids were in kindergarten when Columbine went down. It's been the blink of an eye since the rape of Nanking, Hitler, Stalin or even fall of Rome. We have not evolved. It will happen again and it will happen here. Put all of the gun controls you can in place and watch massacre after massacre continue to occur.

Demonize the glorification of violence, don't demonize gun owners by portraying them as crazy Rambo's on the loose.

About 4000 murders per year in the US are committed by illegals from Mexico. I wonder if you increased the population of the UK by ten percent by adding illegal Frenchmen to all of the low income areas, if their cultural differences would become a factor in crime.

Nowhere on earth do so many cultures and nationalities share a country together in such close proximity. There's the cause, right there. Hundreds of millions of new citizens in the US in only my lifetime. And very little culturally in common. Political correctness encouraging tolerance over common culture - and that culture being one built on Call of Duty, Spartacus, and Zombie movies.

Ignore these factors and watch the insanity continue.

bob2356   befriend   ignore   Tue, 25 Dec 2012, 3:47pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 75

deepcgi says

America funds the defense of Europe including the UK. If the US pulled its thousands of military bases from Europe, Asia, and down under, borders would fall in short order

You have no clue what you are talking about. Other than a very few specific cases like Korea the US military doesn't guard the borders of sovereign nations. Where to you get this stuff?

deepcgi says

You see, there is the problem with the gun control lobby

Obviously you didn't read my post past the first sentence.

deepcgi says

I absolutely guarrantee war will return to the first world.

What does war have to do with the murder rate? Try to stay on subject. We don't consider the numbers because they are irrelevant to the subject at hand.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Tue, 25 Dec 2012, 11:07pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 76

bob2356 says

Banks, stores, gas stations, sports arena's. Bring it on. The logical end point is to have armed guards for every place people gather in groups of 2 or more. The TSA is the logical agency to provide them. Think of the benefits to the unemployment rate. Plus the greatest benefit of preventing living in a police state. See, if you just think it through it all becomes clear.

Have you been to an airport? Did you go to public school?

mdovell   befriend   ignore   Wed, 26 Dec 2012, 12:43am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 77

Homeboy says

The Supreme Court upheld the right to have an abortion, yet it is still argued by right-wingers to this day.

Not quite. They stated that it is legal or at least should be legal and held up as constitutionally as such.

Rights are not dependent on the actions of others. Freedom of speech does not demand a given venue, that is you can speak at any time.

For abortion to be an actual right it would mean that you would have the right to another persons labor. Basically what I am saying is at least for the purposes of the surgical procedure it is dependent on access to the practioner. A women cannot simply "demand" an abortion clinic come to her overnight and perform one. It is also a procedure that requires compensation on some level.

There's a difference between something being legal and something being a right. Just as you do not have a right to vote as you have to register and various states restrict voting depending on if you are in jail.

As for guns in schools well Massachusetts has had special state police at every public college and university since the 1950's.
MGL 22C Section 63
http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleII/Chapter22c/Section63

It also clearly leaves the legalities of having police in public schools totally open.

if it is fine here why is it somehow wrong in every other state? bob2356 says

You have no clue what you are talking about. Other than a very few specific cases like Korea the US military doesn't guard the borders of sovereign nations. Where to you get this stuff?

Um bob that's not was said. There's troops in nearly 2/3rds of the planet. Iraq is a permanent military base just as Germany is, Korea is, Afghanistan is.

The military is deployed in 150 countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_deployments#cite_note-siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil-1

bob2356   befriend   ignore   Wed, 26 Dec 2012, 4:15am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 78

mdovell says

Um bob that's not was said

Um dovell, that was exactly what was said. If the US removed it's military borders would fall. BS. Boarders are being disputed or falling all the time with US troops sitting there. Very few US bases overseas are tactically in a position to field troops no matter what happens. Most are forward supply bases, naval bases, or air bases. There are only 12 countries with more than 1000 US troops, 8 of those are in Europe. Certainly the bases in Japan, Britain, Iceland, Spain, Oman, Turkey, and Italy aren't doing border protection and that's over half the countries with over 1000 troops. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_military_bases_in_the_world_2007.svg

mdovell says

The military is deployed in 150 countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_deployments#cite_note-siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil-1

You didn't look very carefully at your own wiki article. It says countries with less than 100 people aren't listed. There are exactly 29 listed. So 121 countries have less than 100 military stationed there. Sorry but less than a company isn't going to hold anyone's boarders.

StillLooking   befriend   ignore   Wed, 26 Dec 2012, 4:40am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 79

deepcgi says

No legal action taken to regulate guns (or even repeal ammendments) will prevent the very next massacre, simply because there are too many already in circulation. Additionally, there is no evidence as far as I can discern that humans have evolved beyond the warlike and violent nature they have always displayed. Finally, it is clear that there are too few police per capita to sufficiently protect citizens or their children.

We can get rid of guns. So your whole premise is flawed. We got rid of machine guns.

David Losh   befriend   ignore   Wed, 26 Dec 2012, 5:12am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 80

StillLooking says

We got rid of machine guns.

We regulated machine guns. You can still own machine guns in certain States, and the regulation of machine guns drove the price of them up.

There are still those fire arms that are easily convertable to full auto that are in circulation, but again the price of them has gone up.

The reason full auto weapons never became a hot button was the price of amunition. You can own the weapon, but it became extremely expensive to practice with it. You can also rapid fire other weapons that give you a very similar effect.

drew_eckhardt   befriend   ignore   Wed, 26 Dec 2012, 5:32am PST