school shootings
- Thread starter spazzy
- Start date
Okay, so guns are banned in school. They are banned in schools here too. But it is also the right of the child not to be searched, and anyone searching them is violating their rights. If a child is suspected of concealing a gun, they just have to refuse to be searched and nothing can be done about it. What a fat load of use bans are.
Good point on the whole government vs. person issue, Mark. But, I have to wonder, did those who wrote the original constitution not include the right to bear arms as violation/nose-thumbing to an English law banning American colonials from bearing arms? It was necessary at the time, but perhaps not all too smart writing it into an unviolable constitution.
Constitutions get out-dated, while others are far too far ahead of their time, like South Africa\'s. Unfortunately, they are a country\'s ultimate law, and are inviolable.
vincegamer
Active member
Nope. The revolution had been over some 7 years before the introduction of the right to bear arms under the first congress. It was more of a nod to state power since the Articles of Confederation were being dumped. States were told they could not have state armies, and since the US did not have an army either, but \"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.\"
That\'s the language of the amendment. Notice there is nothing about use against the government, as someone suggested.
The fact was there was no national army. But as England could at any time change it\'s mind, we needed to be able to raise an army quickly, so people needed to be able to use guns and to be trained in the militia.
Jefferson, who beleived revolution every 20 years would be necessary, thought it was to protect against our own government, but many others believed it was to fend of foreign invasion.
[edit] oh, and there\'s no right to revolution.
airhead
Coffin Dodger / Keymaster
Sure there is, they are called elections. We are one of the few countries in the world with planned overthrows of our government. (this is a bit tongue-in-cheek in case you didn\'t get it.)
@Markus, don\'t go taking away my rights just because your FiL is too dumb or cheap to buy a decent gun safe.
T
Temporary Sanity
Guest
One of my favorite bumper stickers reads: An armed society is a polite society.
If everyone was armed, you\'d probably think twice about pulling a gun out and shooting someone, cuz you just might be a bit slower on the draw...
Or if that person you were going to mug had a gun, you might not mug \'em.
Yeah I know, I got a backwards way of thinking, but guns don\'t kill people, people kill people. Guns just make it a lot easier.
Ban guns, then what? People start setting off home-brewed bombs in the school cafeteria mixed in their lunch box. If a person is commited to hurting other people, it doesn\'t matter what method they use. They use guns because they\'re right there. They\'re accessible. If they weren\'t, they\'d find something else, maybe something worse.
I\'m a soon-to-be dad, myself, and I hate the thought of my kid attending public school, especially with the influx of gang related violence (yes, we have an abundance up here in Alaska), but I don\'t think that outlawing guns is the answer. Do that, and only outlaws will have guns.
If everyone was armed, you\'d probably think twice about pulling a gun out and shooting someone, cuz you just might be a bit slower on the draw...
Or if that person you were going to mug had a gun, you might not mug \'em.
Yeah I know, I got a backwards way of thinking, but guns don\'t kill people, people kill people. Guns just make it a lot easier.
Ban guns, then what? People start setting off home-brewed bombs in the school cafeteria mixed in their lunch box. If a person is commited to hurting other people, it doesn\'t matter what method they use. They use guns because they\'re right there. They\'re accessible. If they weren\'t, they\'d find something else, maybe something worse.
I\'m a soon-to-be dad, myself, and I hate the thought of my kid attending public school, especially with the influx of gang related violence (yes, we have an abundance up here in Alaska), but I don\'t think that outlawing guns is the answer. Do that, and only outlaws will have guns.
My father-in-law is an @sshole, on that I will agree, but since you can\'t shoot more then one gun at a time then why own them? For \'fun\'? Since I stated that I support the right to bare arms, I must assume that you are a collector Airhead?
Tsk, tsk... I don\'t think Jesus would have owned a gun.
@Vince, here\'s an article that will stick in your craw. It talks about the \'missing\' original 13th Amendment, the one where LAWYERS are not allowed to hold public office.
Oh... and I\'m still looking for the part where we are allowed to revolt, I know I read it somewhere, but there are a lot of official documents to peruse, I\'ll keep looking.
vincegamer
Active member
Ah, the infamous Mr. Dodge.
(his research is \"dodgy\")
I won\'t bother to read the article because I know all about it. See I used to work at the National Archives and Records Administration. While there, I had the opportunity to pour over Mr. Dodge\'s efforts to find proof for his crazy conspiracy theory. He was quite infamous at NARA. Amusing sideline, but really ridiculous.
- oh, and does someone who owns both a van and a motorcycle qualify as a collector? You can only drive one at a time.
I have a question about guns.
Do historical reenactors use real guns, and if so are they disabled?
I\'m asking because my father in law owns a collection of WWII and WWI guns and I know there are WWII and WWI reenactors. When my wife inherrits the collection she will either have them destroyed or sell them - disabled - to reenactors/collectors if they are interested in disabled guns.
(his research is \"dodgy\")
I won\'t bother to read the article because I know all about it. See I used to work at the National Archives and Records Administration. While there, I had the opportunity to pour over Mr. Dodge\'s efforts to find proof for his crazy conspiracy theory. He was quite infamous at NARA. Amusing sideline, but really ridiculous.
- oh, and does someone who owns both a van and a motorcycle qualify as a collector? You can only drive one at a time.
I have a question about guns.
Do historical reenactors use real guns, and if so are they disabled?
I\'m asking because my father in law owns a collection of WWII and WWI guns and I know there are WWII and WWI reenactors. When my wife inherrits the collection she will either have them destroyed or sell them - disabled - to reenactors/collectors if they are interested in disabled guns.
airhead
Coffin Dodger / Keymaster
No, but he ate meat and I like to get my own (at least I used to - rare event any more). I have a few sizes. From small plinkers to shotgun for birds. Largest game I hunt anymore is black circles on white paper targets - don\'t even like to shoot the human silhouettes as they remind me of a life long past.
Just remember, Ted Kennedy\'s car has killed more people than my pistols.
Just remember, Ted Kennedy\'s car has killed more people than my pistols.
Re-enactments are performed using real guns, often times using blanks. They still fire. If you disable the guns they will loose a great deal of their value, and chances are you will have a very difficult time finding somebody to take them off your hands. If you wish to ensure that they will never be used, then your best option in this case would be to instead donate them to a museum. Chances are you can tell your FIL about your feelings, and he may make arragnements for their donation in his will, therefore taking all the hassle off your hands.
If you are a gun owner a good safe is not an option, it is a necessity. Moreover, you should never store your guns and ammo in the same locked storage. If you keep your ammo in your gun safe, it should be within its own locked container. Safety is the utmost priority. I am amazed that an individual who has apparently invested so much into a collection is so nonchalant about protecting it from others, and others from it. Irresponsible.
As far as why an individual should own more than one type, the rifle you use to shoot a deer is quite different than the one you would require for shooting an elk, which would be different than the one you would need to take moose hunting. The same principle applies for shotguns and bird hunting. A smart individual will use the tool that is equal to the job.
You mean this one Vikey?
or
... and if Teddy lost his in a lake then he shouldn\'t get another one.
Jesus ate meat? Are you sure? Were you there, or did you speak to someone who was? lol
Just having a little fun with you Air, but I\'m pretty sure he didn\'t eat pork. Do people still hunt \'pork\'? Are there still wild boars in this country? Why am I asking these irrelevant questions? I just don\'t know...
or
I\'m also in favor of allowing only one car per person too.
... and if Teddy lost his in a lake then he shouldn\'t get another one.
Jesus ate meat? Are you sure? Were you there, or did you speak to someone who was? lol
Just having a little fun with you Air, but I\'m pretty sure he didn\'t eat pork. Do people still hunt \'pork\'? Are there still wild boars in this country? Why am I asking these irrelevant questions? I just don\'t know...
vincegamer
Active member
Not exactly irrelevant. There are wild pigs in the United States. Pigs, when they escape to the wild, are extremely quick to revert to their savage state. The tusks grow, since they aren\'t amputated soon after birth, and wild pigs are very fierce.
They are also an environmental hazard. Pigs are not native to Hawaii, but they have a nasty wild pig population. Thus it is popular sport to hunt wild pig in Hawaii.
Weapon of choice? Handgun.
AinuLainour
New member
Americans don\'t murder because they have guns. If an individual decides to murder somebody, they will do it with or without a gun. There are a hundred and one different ways to end a life without the use of guns, including but not limited to strangulation, suffocation, poisoning, drowning, and blunt force trauma. And the fact that we own guns doesn\'t make me feel safe. If someone were to break into my house I would not be able to retrieve a gun and ammo in time to be effective. I\'m more likely to try to bash him or her with my bedside lamp. My neighborhood, my local law enforcement agency, my dogs, and my husband help me feel safe.
Owning a firearm in the US is not a human right. It is the right of an American citizen that has not proven themselves untrustworthy with such an item.
@ainu - well said.
Well, I had a lengthy reply to Petey all prepared, but my browser decided at that moment to crash, eating the reply. Thankfully, Spazzy, you\'ve pretty much covered what I was going to say. And you did it more precisely and with much less venom than I did
The truth is, like it or not, Americans tend to be more violent than most Europeans. The NON-gun related homicide rate in this country is higher than the TOTAL rate of most European countries. Therefore, the availability of guns doesn\'t seem to really be the cause of our high murder rates.
I\'m not proud of the fact that we seem to be an inherantly violent people, but the problem won\'t be solved or even helped by .ignorant, erroneous & simplistic statements, no matter how nice & easy they sound.
Curiouser and Curiouser
lol
Americans are more violent? Did we breed for violence somehow? Was it a secret Gov\'t conspiracy, to make us more acceptable to war?
Hmmmmmm...
Although we do occassionally hear a story in the news about violence over a SPORTING EVENT, I think the Euro\'s have us beat on that count. I also remember seeing a video of a Thai(?) Congressional meeting where the delegates got up out of there seats and beat the crap out of each other. As much as I would enjoy seeing our politicians do that, I don\'t think it would happen here.
I think everyone here is making broad judgementel statements, including myself. It is very easy to say we are more violent as a nation, but if you consider we are about the size of Europe, and you added ALL of their violence together I think it would be comparable.
Americans are violent... \"The sun never sets on the British Empire\", Alexander, Napolean, Hitler, Ghengis Khan, Al-Kada, etc...
I\'m pretty sure we\'re just experiencing growing pains as it were. This is the first generation that is truly multi-national. Before this we were just a mixed stew, but now with the incredibly high rate of inter-marriage walls are coming down and cultures are clashing.
EDIT: While still trying to find info to back-up an earlier statement of mine I came across this guy. Can we invite him over to our forum? He sounds like fun.
lol
Americans are more violent? Did we breed for violence somehow? Was it a secret Gov\'t conspiracy, to make us more acceptable to war?
Hmmmmmm...
Although we do occassionally hear a story in the news about violence over a SPORTING EVENT, I think the Euro\'s have us beat on that count. I also remember seeing a video of a Thai(?) Congressional meeting where the delegates got up out of there seats and beat the crap out of each other. As much as I would enjoy seeing our politicians do that, I don\'t think it would happen here.
I think everyone here is making broad judgementel statements, including myself. It is very easy to say we are more violent as a nation, but if you consider we are about the size of Europe, and you added ALL of their violence together I think it would be comparable.
Americans are violent... \"The sun never sets on the British Empire\", Alexander, Napolean, Hitler, Ghengis Khan, Al-Kada, etc...
I\'m pretty sure we\'re just experiencing growing pains as it were. This is the first generation that is truly multi-national. Before this we were just a mixed stew, but now with the incredibly high rate of inter-marriage walls are coming down and cultures are clashing.
EDIT: While still trying to find info to back-up an earlier statement of mine I came across this guy. Can we invite him over to our forum? He sounds like fun.
