Another Mass Shooting

[Hal 9000]

Only someone without two braincells to rub together would think there's some kind of equivalency between acts of terrorism or mass murder and vehicular collisions.

Yeah, I think it was Marcus who brought vehicular collisions, bathtub deaths, deaths by own furniture and building fires into the fray.

So uhmmm, yeah you're right.

Edited June 21, 2016 by Hal 9000

[bush_cheney2004]

This is about the stupidest thing I've seen anyone say but you're not trolling. No, sir.

Correct, I am not trolling. I am mocking the pretend outrage and surprise from oh so safe and boring Canada.

Edited June 21, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[Bonam]

The right will disappear as soon as the right judges are appointed to the SC. That amendment can be interpreted either way, depending on how the judge in question chooses to interpret it.

Even if that were true (it isn't)

Yes it is, everything is up to the interpretation of the Supreme Court judges. For example, here is Ginsburg's viewpoint:

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg on the Second Amendment:

"The Second Amendment has a preamble about the need for a militia...Historically, the new government had no money to pay for an army, so they relied on the state militias. And the states required men to have certain weapons and they specified in the law what weapons these people had to keep in their home so that when they were called to do service as militiamen, they would have them. That was the entire purpose of the Second Amendment."

But, Justice Ginsburg explains, "When we no longer need people to keep muskets in their home, then the Second Amendment has no function, its function is to enable the young nation to have people who will fight for it to have weapons that those soldiers will own. So I view the Second Amendment as rooted in the time totally allied to the need to support a militia. So...the Second Amendment is outdated in the sense that its function has become obsolete."

All it would take is 5 of 9 judges on the Supreme Court having a similar viewpoint.

Edited June 21, 2016 by Bonam

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes it is, everything is up to the interpretation of the Supreme Court judges. For example, here is Ginsburg's viewpoint:

All it would take is 5 of 9 judges on the Supreme Court having a similar viewpoint.

And if pigs had wings they could fly. U.S. gun rights in some form will survive any court ruling, because confiscation would result in far worse than another "Orlando shooting".

Edited June 22, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[Bonam]

And if pigs had wings they could fly.

Doubtful. Many animals possess wings and yet are unable to fly. A pig's body is ill suited for flight and the size of wing that would be necessary would be too unwieldy for the pig to be able to lift or actuate. Some kind of glide if starting from a high point might be possible for a pig with wings, but not flight.

U.S. gun rights in some form will survive any court ruling.

True, but they could become significantly more limited than they are now. Gun rights survive in Canada, too, they are just more restricted than they are in the US.

Significant societal changes have happened in the US before as a result of Supreme Court decisions, and will again.

[bush_cheney2004]

Doubtful. Many animals possess wings and yet are unable to fly.

See "bumblebee aerodynamics" and "flight".

True, but they could become significantly more limited than they are now. Gun rights survive in Canada, too, they are just more restricted than they are in the US.

Significant societal changes have happened in the US before as a result of Supreme Court decisions, and will again.

Agreed...like the court's affirmation of the right to own and bear arms, striking down municipal restrictions. Whatever happens in Canada means nothing in this game.

[Bonam]

Agreed...like the court's affirmation of the right to own and bear arms, striking down municipal restrictions. Whatever happens in Canada means nothing in this game.

The court's judgements are largely along partisan lines. There is always plausible-sounding legal reasoning to be made for both sides of almost any case that makes it before the SC. If Hillary wins the election and manages to get a liberal judge appointed to the SC, I think it is quite probable you'll see a different outcome next time a gun case comes before the SC.

[waldo]

Whatever happens in Canada means nothing in this game.

oh really! Talk to the NRA-hand: NRA involved in gun registry debate

The National Rifle Association, a powerful lobbying group in the United States that advocates fewer gun controls, has been actively involved in trying to abolish Canada's long-gun registry for more than a decade, CBC News has learned.

Documents and correspondence obtained by the CBC show the NRA has provided logistical and tactical support to organizations such as the Canadian Institute for Legislative Action (CILA), established in 1998 to lobby Ottawa to shut down the registry.

In 2000, the NRA paid $100,000 for an infomercial about what it called "the Canadian situation" that aired on The National Network in the U.S., according to Bernardo, who appeared in the video.

It cautioned gun owners the registry was a government plot to find out how many guns there were in order to seize them and leave citizens helpless to defend themselves.

.

[bush_cheney2004]

The court's judgements are largely along partisan lines. There is always plausible-sounding legal reasoning to be made for both sides of almost any case that makes it before the SC. If Hillary wins the election and manages to get a liberal judge appointed to the SC, I think it is quite probable you'll see a different outcome next time a gun case comes before the SC.

I don't, as there is a much larger dynamic involved with 2nd Amendment battles. The court has the burden of previous rulings, constitutional law, existing firearms ownership stemming from an enumerated right, impacted state constitutions and laws, enforcement considerations, and likely constitutional amendment campaign to override the court.

The SC created "abortion rights" out of thin air, but would be hard pressed to take away an enumerated right to own/bear arms.

[Argus]

Doubtful. Many animals possess wings and yet are unable to fly. A pig's body is ill suited for flight and the size of wing that would be necessary would be too unwieldy for the pig to be able to lift or actuate. Some kind of glide if starting from a high point might be possible for a pig with wings, but not flight.

Watch out, bonam, BC has an enormous degree of aeronautical expertise! I'm sure he's done the math here!

[Argus]

I don't, as there is a much larger dynamic involved with 2nd Amendment battles. The court has the burden of previous rulings, constitutional law, existing firearms ownership stemming from an enumerated right, impacted state constitutions and laws, enforcement considerations, and likely constitutional amendment campaign to override the court.

The court isn't going to come out and remove all rights to firearms. What it will do, presuming it has a more liberal (and sane) bent, is permit local municipalities and states to impose more sensible restrictions, such as waiting times, background checks, and bans on certain kinds of guns and magazine sizes. I don't see the government taking guns away from hunters and farmers any more than they've done in Canada, but it will be become a lot harder to buy high capacity magazines.

Like, if you missed that deer with your first ten shots, you're just gonna have to find another deer. Sorry.

[bush_cheney2004]

.... I don't see the government taking guns away from hunters and farmers any more than they've done in Canada, but it will be become a lot harder to buy high capacity magazines.

With regard to gun rights, I don't give a damn what happens in Canada, as it is irrelevant...nice try.

Like, if you missed that deer with your first ten shots, you're just gonna have to find another deer. Sorry.

And yet, more guns and "high capacity" magazines will continue to be sold. Stay tuned to American media for the next thoughts on this matter.

[WestCoastRunner]

And yet, more guns and "high capacity" magazines will continue to be sold. Stay tuned to American media for the next thoughts on this matter.

Next thoughts: "The civil rights icon and Democratic congressman from Georgia led a dramatic protest inside the House of Representatives. He and fellow Democrats sat down at the front of the chamber in an unusual demonstration of civil disobedience challenging Republican Speaker Paul Ryan."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/22/politics/john-lewis-sit-in-gun-violence/index.html

[Boges]

So that Fillibuster ended up doing nothing eh? Predicted that.

Pro Gun Control candidates will get primaried before they even see a general election.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Boges

[Guest]

So that Fillibuster ended up doing nothing eh? Predicted that.

It might have done something with regards to the election in November.

[bush_cheney2004]

Next thoughts: "The civil rights icon and Democratic congressman from Georgia led a dramatic protest inside the House of Representatives. He and fellow Democrats sat down at the front of the chamber in an unusual demonstration of civil disobedience challenging Republican Speaker Paul Ryan."

House was not in session....pure political theatre for the cameras. More guns sold today...and tomorrow.

[The_Squid]

Next thoughts: "The civil rights icon and Democratic congressman from Georgia led a dramatic protest inside the House of Representatives. He and fellow Democrats sat down at the front of the chamber in an unusual demonstration of civil disobedience challenging Republican Speaker Paul Ryan."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/22/politics/john-lewis-sit-in-gun-violence/index.html

LOL

They could have passed some gun control laws when they had majorities in both houses... but they didn't.

But now they're the "conscious of America" because they perform a "sit-in" in their own workplace?

[WestCoastRunner]

LOL

They could have passed some gun control laws when they had majorities in both houses... but they didn't.

But now they're the "conscious of America" because they perform a "sit-in" in their own workplace?

Does it matter when or why? When the population has 90% approval for stricter gun control laws shouldn't they capitalize on this.

[cybercoma]

Does it matter when or why? When the population has 90% approval for stricter gun control laws shouldn't they capitalize on this.

Theyre capitalizing on the fact that they can't do a damn thing and they know it. When they could do something about it they didn't. What does that tell you? It's just another football.

[WestCoastRunner]

Theyre capitalizing on the fact that they can't do a damn thing and they know it. When they could do something about it they didn't. What does that tell you? It's just another football.

Sit in closing in on 13 hours.

[GostHacked]

Sit in closing in on 13 hours.

Which will amount to nothing. It's not the guns that are the issue here.

[cybercoma]

Sit in closing in on 13 hours.

So?

[Big Guy]

The latest investigation by the FBI, CSIS and Interpol have found a similarity between 98% of mass shootings. About 98% of mass shooters shared a common physiological trait – each had two distinct sex chromosomes (XY), and are identified as the heterogametic sex.

This direct correlation between sex chromosomes had startled investigators and caused pause to profile the typical mass murder. This profound discovery has now expanded the scope of possible mass murderers to 3,477,829,638 people. This has created problems for those who compile the USA no-fly list.

The investigative community has balked at these figures and is working on streamlining the potential list based on other factors – like religion or culture or nationalism or colour or ... but historical data indicates that factors based on criteria of race are actually inaccurate, prejudging the creation of the data base and play into personal fears and dislikes.

I suggest that the message is to be very wary of anyone carrying the (XY) chromosome, since that appears to be the cause of these mass shootings!