Ozinasia wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 3:28 pm I worry these video games have a lot to do with desensitizing kids, killing bloody zombies seems to be every popular game. I watched with horror my live ins 13 year playing a game earlier a guy walking through a shopping Mall shooting what were zombies but aside from their slightly misshapen form they were essentially men women and children. Blown to bits in horrible bloody detail
About a month or so the cops had this kid for some reason and he told them he wanted to kill a lot of people. they ignored it.
Now what do they think. The grandmother reported to police she was in fear of her life she ended up buying a gun to protect herself , probably the same gun he used dont know the whole damn thing is gut-wrenching

I´m sorry but those video games are available globally and mass shootings are quite ( not completely ) unique to the US. Everytime a tragedy like this happens the US look for "red flags "" , background checks , police repsonse times , school security etc..... every single thing else is looked at except for the great big elephant in the room GUNS !

In Texas, straw purchases are not illegal, they are at the Federal level. About a week ago a man in Dallas was arrested by ATF after purchasing 92 guns, 75 from the same licensed gun dealer in a 6-month period. This individual had a Texas license to carry so a background check was not required for each gun purchase. Then the individual sold those guns to other individuals without performing a background check or having a license to sell.

Sixteen (16) of those weapons were recovered after crimes were committed in Texas, Maryland, and Canada, which I assume is how they were able to trace those weapons back to the individual who initially purchased them. The gun store owner has lost his license and I guess we’ll see what happens to the individual from Dallas. And I guess we’ll see how many more crimes are committed with the other weapons in the next few years.

A red flag law could have stopped this very early.

IraHayes wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 4:16 pm Here is an excellent article that very clearly lays out why the 2nd Amendment will never be changed
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/wha ... -amendment

An valid point but discussion of repealing the second amendment is slightly off the mark as it's actually unneccessary. Change in consti­tu­tional doctrine doesn't require an amendment to be repealed.

“A fraud on the Amer­ican public.” That’s how former Chief Justice Warren Burger described the idea that the Second Amend­ment gives an unfettered indi­vidual right to a gun. When he spoke these words to PBS in 1990, the rock-ribbed conser­vat­ive appoin­ted by Richard Nixon was express­ing the long­time consensus of histor­i­ans and judges across the polit­ical spec­trum.

The Second Amend­ment consists of just one sentence, “A well regu­lated mili­tia, being neces­sary for the secur­ity of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” It is the interpretation of this single sentance that determines the legality of gun restrictions.

Four times between 1876 and 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to rule that the Second Amend­ment protec­ted indi­vidual gun owner­ship outside the context of a mili­tia. As the Tennessee Supreme Court put it in 1840, “A man in the pursuit of deer, elk, and buffa­loes might carry his rifle every day for forty years, and yet it would never be said of him that he had borne arms; much less could it be said that a private citizen bears arms because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane.”

In fact it wasn't until 2008 in the Supreme Court's ruling on, "the District of Columbia v. Heller" striking down Washington D.C.'s ban on handguns, that the interpretation of second amendment was redefined as, "guar­an­tee[ing] a right to own a weapon “in common use” to protect “hearth and home.”

The Supreme Court ruling was the result of 40 years of funding and advocacy by the NRA and Republican party following the 1977, “Revolt at Cincin­nati.” when activ­ists from the Second Amend­ment Found­a­tion and the Citizens Commit­tee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms took control of the NRA leadership. Where the NRA led, the GOP followed, in 1980 the GOP plat­form proclaimed, “We believe the right of citizens to keep and bear arms must be preserved. Accord­ingly, we oppose federal regis­tra­tion of fire­arms.” That year the NRA gave Reagan its first-ever pres­id­en­tial endorse­ment.

From 1888, when law review articles first were indexed, through 1959, every single one on the Second Amend­ment concluded it did not guar­an­tee an indi­vidual right to a gun. The first to argue other­wise, writ­ten by a William and Mary law student named Stuart R. Hays, appeared in 1960. He began by citing an article in the NRA’s Amer­ican Rifle­man magazine.

In 2003, the NRA Found­a­tion provided $1 million to endow the Patrick Henry profess­or­ship in consti­tu­tional law and the Second Amend­ment at George Mason Univer­sity Law School. This fusil­lade of schol­ar­ship and pseudo-schol­ar­ship insisted that the tradi­tional view—shared by courts and histor­i­ans—was wrong. There had been a colossal consti­tu­tional mistake. Two centur­ies of legal consensus, they argued, must be over­turned.

NRA and Republican efforts during this time also focused on public opinion;

In 1959, accord­ing to a Gallup poll, 60 percent of Amer­ic­ans favored banning hand­guns; that dropped to 41 percent by 1975 and 24 percent in 2012. By early 2008, accord­ing to Gallup, 73 percent of Amer­ic­ans believed the Second Amend­ment “guar­an­teed the rights of Amer­ic­ans to own guns” outside the mili­tia.

There is no legal reason why a future Supreme Court ruling cannot return to a century of precedent and determine that the Second Amendment does not in fact give the individual unfettered rights to own firearms. It would however, likely take a long capaign of public education, scholarship and legal challenge.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ ... -amendment

newkidontheblock wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 4:36 pm Woke culture of the new generation. Instead of getting on with life, destroy and erase anything offensive or sad.

Easier to deal with if no evidence exists.

Earlier generations would make a memorial plaque and continue on.

These are my opinions and mine alone.

Don’t feel like the Lone Ranger Your opinion is kinda like mine are
But … mine a just a little more radical than yours
Not a practical idea to destroy a good building