PussEKatt Posted June 15, 2022 Share Posted June 15, 2022 15 hours ago, sidcow said: Guns don't kill people. People kill people. But the guns don't half **** help. As one "gun person"said after a school shooting ( last year I think."the way to stop a guy with a gun is to have a guy with a bigger gun".Good thinking there.So, if everyone carries a bazooka that should stop gun violence forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted June 19, 2022 Moderator Share Posted June 19, 2022 The balls on this kid 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAuthority Posted June 19, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted June 19, 2022 45 minutes ago, bickster said: The balls on this kid He'll probably also suffer from PTSD. What a friggin' world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61915237 Quote Supreme Court reverses New York gun law The US Supreme Court has struck down a New York law restricting gun carrying rights. The law required residents who want a license to prove "proper cause" to carry concealed weapons and that they faced "a special or unique" danger. The 6-3 decision stated the requirement violates the Constitutional right to bear arms. The ruling is likely to impact other states with strict requirements for concealed carry permits. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the six-justice conservative majority on the court, held that Americans have a right to carry "commonly used" firearms for personal defence. The Second Amendment right to bear arms is not a "second class" constitutional right subject to greater restrictions "than other Bill of Rights guarantees," he wrote. The liberal justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer dissented. The crazy side of America strikes again! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted June 23, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted June 23, 2022 (edited) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61915237 Quote The US Supreme Court has struck down a New York law restricting gun carrying rights. So one of the biggest cities in the world, visited by millions and millions of tourists every year, you can just walk around with a concealed weapon. unbelievable. edit: beaten to it i see. at least i'm not the only one that thinks it's ludicrous Edited June 23, 2022 by tomav84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straggler Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 It's a fricking amendment. It can and should be amended to take into context the availability of modern military equipment and it's daily use against the civilian population by the civilian population. Slavishly following the words written hundreds of years ago, no matter how well-meaning those words are, is so self-defeating. Even the framers of the constitution wrote it to evolve over time as society changes. It was never intended as anything other than a broad framework of principles that were to endure, with specifics that could change over time. The process to change the constitution is written into the constitution. To treat it more like a religious document, one immutable truth that can and will be adhered to at all times despite the consequences, is in itself against the constitution. That said, regardless of the intentions of those that wrote the constitution, it seems to me that if the framework that a country is built on has resulted in a society that has hundreds of school shootings a year then it is incumbent upon the political class of the time to make a break with the chains of the past that are preventing positive change now. I don't really care how one person or another interprets the constitution. Today's problems need today's legislation. The USA would still be a colony if the founding fathers had been timid little bitches like the current generation of politicians. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitvilla Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 In the context of good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns. The answer not surprisingly is not really. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
il_serpente Posted June 23, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted June 23, 2022 1 hour ago, tomav84 said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61915237 So one of the biggest cities in the world, visited by millions and millions of tourists every year, you can just walk around with a concealed weapon. unbelievable. edit: beaten to it i see. at least i'm not the only one that thinks it's ludicrous At risk of being accused of defending the decision, which I'm not, it's a little more nuanced than that. New York's law required anyone wanting permission to carry a gun outside their home to provide proof that they need to do that for self defense. Two justices writing supporting opinions explicitly stated that the ruling does not prevent states from having licensing requirement and that it does not invalidate laws in 43 states that place restrictions on concealed carry. It's certainly a blow, but not quite a return to the Wild West. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 2 minutes ago, fruitvilla said: In the context of good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns. The answer not surprisingly is not really. That's 12 times a public citizen stopped an attacker. 12 times! It's amazing. Imagine if we upgraded everyone to having their own RPGs, nukes and ICBMs. The public would stop a trillion shootings every day. Come on Supreme Court, i think it should be compulsory for every human and dog to carry RPGs with them everywhere they go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 28 minutes ago, Straggler said: It's a fricking amendment. It can and should be amended to take into context the availability of modern military equipment and it's daily use against the civilian population by the civilian population. Slavishly following the words written hundreds of years ago, no matter how well-meaning those words are, is so self-defeating. Even the framers of the constitution wrote it to evolve over time as society changes. It was never intended as anything other than a broad framework of principles that were to endure, with specifics that could change over time. The process to change the constitution is written into the constitution. To treat it more like a religious document, one immutable truth that can and will be adhered to at all times despite the consequences, is in itself against the constitution. That said, regardless of the intentions of those that wrote the constitution, it seems to me that if the framework that a country is built on has resulted in a society that has hundreds of school shootings a year then it is incumbent upon the political class of the time to make a break with the chains of the past that are preventing positive change now. I don't really care how one person or another interprets the constitution. Today's problems need today's legislation. The USA would still be a colony if the founding fathers had been timid little bitches like the current generation of politicians. But therein lies the problem, I may be wide of the mark but don’t a lot of folks in the US actually think the constitution is somehow sanctioned by god? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Absolutely bonkers. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
il_serpente Posted June 23, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted June 23, 2022 8 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said: But therein lies the problem, I may be wide of the mark but don’t a lot of folks in the US actually think the constitution is somehow sanctioned by god? Exactly. Amending the constitution or repealing existing amendments is certainly possible, but it's extremely difficult. It first has to be passed by Congress, where rural states have disproportionate representation in the Senate and would probably require 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. Then it has to be ratified by the states, which I believe requires a 2/3 majority. It would never pass in the South, Midwest and West. Congress passed the Equal Rights Amendment in the early 70's but it never got ratified be enough states, and that was something as innocuous and uncontroversial as saying "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the Unites States or by any State on account of sex." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
il_serpente Posted June 23, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted June 23, 2022 I'm more worried about the states that have no interest in restricting guns at all, which this SCOTUS ruling has no impact on: Man Carrying Assault Rifle Publicly Was Totally Fine. But His Brass Knuckles Were Illegal. | HuffPost Latest News Quote On June 13, a man in a tactical vest was openly carrying a semi-automatic rifle and holstered pistol in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma. Not surprisingly, people were pretty freaked out. Employees at the Broken Arrow Justice Center ― a government building that houses the local court and police offices ― locked their doors, and someone called 911. More people called 911 when he approached a Target. But the police couldn’t really do anything about this guy. Officers determined that his actions were completely fine based on Oklahoma’s constitutional carry law, which allows people ages 21 and over to carry firearms in public without a permit or training. And it’s a preview of what’s to come after the Supreme Court struck down a New York gun control law on Thursday, setting the stage for more restrictions on firearms to fall. The Oklahoma man continued to scare people. He then walked into an AT&T store, prompting employees to “run out the back of the store.” Police were finally able to arrest the man because, during the course of this chaos, they discovered that he had a recently issued, unrelated warrant. Officers then found out that he was carrying brass knuckles ― which actually are illegal under state and city law ― and a .50 caliber semi-automatic pistol concealed in a pouch, rather than a holster, which is also illegal. But again, walking around with the semi-automatic rifle was completely fine. Rogers County Sheriff Scott Walton told Tulsa World that “nobody needs to be walking down the street with a rifle.” “But I don’t make the laws; we just try to live by them and do a very difficult job in a world that’s got those people in it,” he added. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 54 minutes ago, markavfc40 said: Absolutely bonkers. So many different words to describe that woman but I'm going to use word removed She's a lunatic and she's not bullshitting or full of bravado or toeing a party line she's a fully paid up member of the cult 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted June 24, 2022 Share Posted June 24, 2022 15 hours ago, villa4europe said: So many different words to describe that woman but I'm going to use word removed She's a lunatic and she's not bullshitting or full of bravado or toeing a party line she's a fully paid up member of the cult That's exactly it. She wouldn't be saying/doing anything unless she was getting decent compo for it. She's literally being played (paid) to be a stooge for gun companies, and you'd hope she was too stupid to realise that, because if she did realise that, it would be somehow worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted June 24, 2022 Share Posted June 24, 2022 Well,as far as I am concerned she is %100 right.Dont any of you people on here realise that the English could attack at any time.FFS.Best to be prepared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted June 24, 2022 Share Posted June 24, 2022 The bit that really, really made me realise it's just an irreconcilable difference is when one of he examples she gave of the problems with this legislation is the idea that veterans with PTSD would have their guns taken away. **** good?!?! She's in favour of people with diagnosed mental health conditions having guns. Jesus christ. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 She knows what she's doing as soon as she mentions veterans, it's irrational outrage inducing to her target audience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 (edited) Was a shooting in Oslo Norway last night where a group of civilians overpowered the shooter and subdued him. Sadly at least 2 people died and something like 20 were injured before they did. Guy was targeting a gay bar apparently and they are treating it like terrorism. Guy is in custody. Pretty crazy video and those guys are braver than I think I would have been. Edited June 25, 2022 by sne 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 23 hours ago, Davkaus said: She's in favour of people with diagnosed mental health conditions having guns. Jesus christ. Thats how that famous American sniper died.He was coaching an ex soldier at the gun range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts