Yesterday's Mass Shooting.

DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Dorian2 said:
When is America going to open its eyes to the reality of the situation?

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/school-shootings-by-country
Click to expand...
Freedum, their eyes are wide open, but fear distorts and blinds them to reality. The majority of dumb asses who own a gun are most often its victim, or a family member. It was also a statutes symbol for a long time, only white people were allowed to have guns. It's still that way as the cops tend to kill any armed black motorist and bow scrape and return the gun, if they even touch it in the first place, for armed white motorists. I don't hear the NRA complaining about their 2nd amendment rights, they never do, white domestic terrorists are another matter.
 
Dorian2

Dorian2

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
Freedum, their eyes are wide open, but fear distorts and blinds them to reality. The majority of dumb asses who own a gun are most often its victim, or a family member. It was also a statutes symbol for a long time, only white people were allowed to have guns. It's still that way as the cops tend to kill any armed black motorist and bow scrape and return the gun, if they even touch it in the first place, for armed white motorists. I don't hear the NRA complaining about their 2nd amendment rights, they never do, white domestic terrorists are another matter.
Click to expand...
I was asking about ineffective gun laws. Not race or racial profiling.
 
sweetisland2009

sweetisland2009

Well-Known Member
sunni said:
this happened actually quite close to my home.

that school had SEVEN armed security guards , and the doors were all locked, i dont believe as of current they have said how he got in
its been pretty tense here and yesterday in the Illinois side another student was caught with unloaded guns trying to enter their school
Click to expand...
I appreciated that when the security guard was interviewed he said something along the lines of “I’m not going to share publicly how he got in I don’t want to give anyone else any ideas”


DIY-HP-LED said:
It makes ya wonder when the polling on gun control and women's choice differs so much from the election results. I guess folks have other priorities than what they tell the pollsters. Schoolhouses should not be turned into slaughterhouses over sheer stupidity, most of the civilized world is appalled, as are civilized Americans.
Click to expand...
Most legal gun owners are civilized Americans though; so it gets very difficult to convince them they are inherently bad because another group of mostly civilized Americans who choose not to arm themselves says so
 
Last edited:
Dorian2

Dorian2

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
The two are intimately related unfortunately
Click to expand...
It's also related to Political appeasement of normal gun owners who actually follow the law re: their guns. Crux of the issue is piss poor, weak assed gun laws in general. Way too many details to suss out in a simple thread on a weed forum though.

EDIT: Also keep in mind this is from a non-gun owner in a different country who can't possibly appreciate the nuances of the issue.
 
Roger A. Shrubber

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
sweetisland2009 said:
I appreciated that when the security guard was interviewed he said something along the lines of “I’m not going to share publicly how he got in I don’t want to give anyone else any ideas”




Most legal gun owners are civilized Americans though; so it gets very difficult to convince them they are inherently bad because another group of mostly civilized Americans who choose not to arm themselves says so
Click to expand...
the thing is...Americans are brainwashed to believe the word "rights" is some kind of magical god granted thing...the founding fathers clearly never meant for anything like the present situation to occur, they had no idea of the technological OR sociological changes that would occur since they wrote the constitution. the phrasing of the second amendment also clearly states that gun ownership should require the owner to participate in a national guard type "militia" which would be well regulated BY THE STATE...
but of course, they don't bother to read that part, as it doesn't jibe with their fucker up, self indulgent, self serving interpretation of the second amendment...
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Dorian2 said:
It's also related to Political appeasement of normal gun owners who actually follow the law re: their guns. Crux of the issue is piss poor, weak assed gun laws in general. Way too many details to suss out in a simple thread on a weed forum though.

EDIT: Also keep in mind this is from a non-gun owner in a different country who can't possibly appreciate the nuances of the issue.
Click to expand...
Imo a component of the crux of the issue is a double standard for different kinds of civilian.
 
Roger A. Shrubber

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Not a shooting, this is the guy that ran over all the people at the Waukesha christmas parade...
He's facing close to 1000 years of combined sentences...And still acting up in court. Too bad he can't live that long, in a cage...
6 consecutive life sentences, and 859 years in confinement. Bet hitting all those people doesn't seem like such a good fucking idea now.
https://www.wisn.com/article/darrell-brooks-waukesha-parade-sentencing-scheduling/41821181
 
C

carlsbarn

Well-Known Member
Roger A. Shrubber said:
the thing is...Americans are brainwashed to believe the word "rights" is some kind of magical god granted thing...the founding fathers clearly never meant for anything like the present situation to occur, they had no idea of the technological OR sociological changes that would occur since they wrote the constitution. the phrasing of the second amendment also clearly states that gun ownership should require the owner to participate in a national guard type "militia" which would be well regulated BY THE STATE...
but of course, they don't bother to read that part, as it doesn't jibe with their fucker up, self indulgent, self serving interpretation of the second amendment...
Click to expand...

Most of the original authors posited that the constitution should be more of a living framework for future documents. Jefferson went so far as recommending that it be entirely rewritten every 19 years to better suit an incoming generation. It boggles my mind that so much energy and weight is given to a document. An entire branch of the federal government is allotted the task of interpreting the damn thing. Half of The original authors owned people…fucking owned people! Yet we hold them up as some noble group of well intentioned intellectuals carving in stone the rules a society they could have never imagined must live by. Fucking nuts.




In a letter written to James Madison from Paris just after the French Revolution had broken out, Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) argues that any Constitution expires after 19 years and must be renewed if it is not to become “an act of force and not of right”:
The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never to have been started either on this or our side of the water… (But) between society and society, or generation and generation there is no municipal obligation, no umpire but the law of nature. We seem not to have perceived that, by the law of nature, one generation is to another as one independant nation to another… On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation… Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19. years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force and not of right.
Click to expand...
The year the U.S. Constitution was ratified was also the year the French Revolution broke out and Thomas Jefferson was there to witness it. In this letter to James Madison, Jefferson asks whether or not “one generation of men has a right to bind another,” either in the form of a financial debt or a political obligation to obey a constitution of laws not contracted by that individual. He comes to the surprising conclusion that any constitution (the American included) has to lapse roughly after every generation (actually, based on his calculations, every 19 years) since it was first signed and ratified. Thus, the American Constitution should lapse and become null and void in 1808. Jefferson believed in the principle that “the earth belongs to the living and not to the dead” which meant that previous generations could not bind the current generation to pay their debts, or require them to work in their father’s occupation, or to accept the laws and constitution drawn up by their ancestors. In his mind, “no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law”. The only “umpire” between the generations was the law of nature.”
 
Roger A. Shrubber

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
carlsbarn said:
Most of the original authors posited that the constitution should be more of a living framework for future documents. Jefferson went so far as recommending that it be entirely rewritten every 19 years to better suit an incoming generation. It boggles my mind that so much energy and weight is given to a document. An entire branch of the federal government is allotted the task of interpreting the damn thing. Half of The original authors owned people…fucking owned people! Yet we hold them up as some noble group of well intentioned intellectuals carving in stone the rules a society they could have never imagined must live by. Fucking nuts.




In a letter written to James Madison from Paris just after the French Revolution had broken out, Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) argues that any Constitution expires after 19 years and must be renewed if it is not to become “an act of force and not of right”:

The year the U.S. Constitution was ratified was also the year the French Revolution broke out and Thomas Jefferson was there to witness it. In this letter to James Madison, Jefferson asks whether or not “one generation of men has a right to bind another,” either in the form of a financial debt or a political obligation to obey a constitution of laws not contracted by that individual. He comes to the surprising conclusion that any constitution (the American included) has to lapse roughly after every generation (actually, based on his calculations, every 19 years) since it was first signed and ratified. Thus, the American Constitution should lapse and become null and void in 1808. Jefferson believed in the principle that “the earth belongs to the living and not to the dead” which meant that previous generations could not bind the current generation to pay their debts, or require them to work in their father’s occupation, or to accept the laws and constitution drawn up by their ancestors. In his mind, “no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law”. The only “umpire” between the generations was the law of nature.”
Click to expand...
good sentiments, and a lot of it is workable, but some of it isn't...a nation accumulates debt, and it must be paid.
certain rights MUST be guaranteed, in perpetuity, or fascist bastards like the current crop of republicans will try to impose their will, their values, and their fears upon everyone else.
Church and state must remain separate, for there to actually be religious freedom within a country, no religion can be "dominant".
 
C

carlsbarn

Well-Known Member
Roger A. Shrubber said:
good sentiments, and a lot of it is workable, but some of it isn't...a nation accumulates debt, and it must be paid.
certain rights MUST be guaranteed, in perpetuity, or fascist bastards like the current crop of republicans will try to impose their will, their values, and their fears upon everyone else.
Church and state must remain separate, for there to actually be religious freedom within a country, no religion can be "dominant".
Click to expand...
I hear you and I agree. Guess the crux of it is WHICH rights must be guaranteed (in perpetuity) and who decides. It's an I say potato/my neighbor says bump stock 30 round magazine argument.

So far as church/state separation, the US has lived on a thin veneer of these words when in reality the church and its dominant religion has been used continually as a political lever to steer policy. It’s not an all encompassing force and it’s grasp is weakening but to deny there is a "dominant" religion feels like a wink wink nod arrangement.

I'd love to banter but I’ve got like 20 hours of work to fit into an 8 hour day. Y’all be good to yourselves.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
carlsbarn said:
… It boggles my mind that so much energy and weight is given to a document. An entire branch of the federal government is allotted the task of interpreting the damn thing.
Click to expand...
It is worth remembering that very many Americans are trained into this primacy and immutability of text by their churches. Evangelical doctrine states plainly that the Bible is the only and entire authority. To get past the obvious limitations of a limited text, the doctrine of “the living word” has been put into play. Naturally (!), this does not mean adapting the text to our evolving perception of physical and human nature. It means distorting observations of reality to fit the dogmatic container of the text.

The straitjacket of doctrine as interpreted to us by the leaders of the congregations (and whose unfitness for this duty is laid bare by the hypocrisy of their deeds and lifestyles, which is further buttressed by the abominable Calvinist idea that earthly success indicates admission to the limited number of seats at God’s table!) is beyond negotiation. Thus the pastors use their position to pervert the teachings of Jesus into something relentlessly evil.

So enough of Americans have been trained into believing and practicing delusions of consequence, and treating the Constitution as a living document means not adapting the text to ever-changing political reality, but cruelly corseting reality into a liturgy of originality or strict-constructionist contortion, in obedient analogy to the way the Bible is taught.

Now we have the dominionists taking their agenda of naked hate into the open, closing the circle the above implies. Democrats are nothing less than heretics to the rampant hard right, and history shows heretics being assigned the cruelest punishments, as they are the ones who can upset the apple cart its beneficiaries and operators know to be constructed on some very big lies.
 
Last edited:
sweetisland2009

sweetisland2009

Well-Known Member
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top