Are we so Societally Evolved as to render the Constitiution (2nd Amend.) Antiquated...

[bendog]

Yes, mankind is as dangerous today as it was in 1789.

I read Winston Groom's second book As Summers Die a few weeks ago. It's thinly veiled fiction for the black society that arose from oil discoveries and ended in the 1921 race riot. Groom doesn't do the riot. But we Americans have always been quite capable of inconceivable cruelty including mass murders on a fairly routine basis.

School shootings are just one setting for today's mass murders. Their horror is of course amplified because the killers usually are people with grievances who choose to kill the most vulnerable. The NRA are a few murdering bastard rich gun dealers who are more concerned with profits than either gun rights or protecting kids. Gun bans aren't going to do much, but hopefully we'll actually do something this time instead of sitting around till another Sandy Hook. And btw, if you're lucky enough to be able to afford private schools, they tend to have better security.

 

[bendog]

I don't? Could have fooled me.

This thread is about how "evolved" societies shouldn't have this problem. School shootings are just a symptom of a corrupt, immoral, nihilistic society. Remind me which political ideology has dominated the social sphere since the 60s?

No. It's a symptom of ridiculous gun policy.

I'm not accepting the OP notion that we've somehow evolved. I don't think there's any proof we are more, or less, violent than we were in 1788. Guns are a lot more effective. LOL

Agreed. Devolved in some ways. Even wild west towns banned firearms within city limits.

yeah, the folks who view the Second as somehow special and different from other amendments tend to overlook restrictions that were in place in the 18th and 19th centuries. But those restrictions did not limit the means for law abiding citizens to defend themselves. I wish Scalia had taken an extra page or two in Heller to get to that.

What "restrictions" where those? in the 1920s you could walk into a hardware store and buy a Thompson submachine gun.

And the federal govt outlawed Thompsons for private purchase. Funny how that worked, angry obscene child.

 

[hunarcy]

LOL! I didn't rejected it. I merely pointed out he was basing his opinion on one person's point of view because he agreed with it. When you "interpret" the Constitution as "living document" you risk turning it to something that was NOT intended. Now, I realize there must be flexibility to deal with changing times, but that's not the same as twisting it into something new.

I've been hearing that same excuse (figuratively speaking) since Roe v Wade. At issue now is the 2nd Amendment. Like with abortion, it's a highly volatile and emotional topic. Those who defend it are solidly intransigent about it which negates any pragmatic discussion on it. SCOTUS really doesn't want to get involved in it which leaves it still up for discussion, if possible. I don't believe 2A is absolute from a legal perspective. It has limitations that should be explored and tested.
`

I think the phrase "shall not be infringed." is pretty absolute.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

And those tools are the Constitution and its case law.

Funny how our Founders didn't use the constitution and caselaw to fight the British

Apparently the British weren't like the liberal 'progressives' we have today... so enlightened & all....

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

 

[easyt65]

We have an ignored culture of promoting violence / gun violence....

The Video Game industry and Hollywood make billions of dollars creating, promoting, and selling gun violence, knowingly or not conducting the psychological desensitization to such violence, death, and the worth of human life.
--- Due to their monetary political donations and support these industries have been protected from policy / legislation / change.

Mental Illness still has not been seriously addressed as a prominent factor in these shootings or how to address it.

The decline of government-controlled school systems, that are more interested in the political indoctrination that education of our children, the resulting failed status of our schools, and the negative effect these failed schools have on students like the Parkland, Fl shooter - how schools continue to fail students - has not been sufficiently addressed.

The complete failure of the Law Enforcement divisions to prevent such tragedies - especially this one - when they have been warned far well in advance (40+ police calls to investigate / respond, multiple warnings by those who saw something and reported it) has been partially ignored in a rush to use the tragedy politically to push anti-gun/Amendment agendas and policies.


The FBI and the Obama administration was warned by Putin and the Russian Govt that the Tsarnaev brothers were terrorists who intended to commit a terrorist attack on US soil against Americans, that 1 of the brothers had traveled abroad and attended a terrorist training camp - confirmed by the Obama administration and FBI, and the FBI / Obama administration still failed to prevent the brothers from committing the Boston Marathon Bombing.
---- AFTER the attack, in an attempt to cover-up their failure to prevent the attacks the Obama administration / FBI posted the pictures of the brothers on nation-wide TV and asked the public to help identify them....EVEN THOUGHT THEY ALREADY KNEW EXACTLY WHO THEY WERE!
---- Politicians did not immediately begin calling for the banning / outlawing of PRESSURE COOKERS, which were used in the terrorist attack.

A reported 11 kids / young people are killed EVERY DAY due to Texting While Driving.
- Where is the declaration that PHONES kill people?
- Where is the call to raise the legal age to purchase a PHONE to 21 years of age?
- Where is the call for the banning of phones?
(If Texting while Driving is responsible for so many deaths, why aren't WiFi and Bluetooth banned from being installed in vehicles?)

 

[bripat9643]

No. It's a symptom of ridiculous gun policy.

I'm not accepting the OP notion that we've somehow evolved. I don't think there's any proof we are more, or less, violent than we were in 1788. Guns are a lot more effective. LOL

Agreed. Devolved in some ways. Even wild west towns banned firearms within city limits.

yeah, the folks who view the Second as somehow special and different from other amendments tend to overlook restrictions that were in place in the 18th and 19th centuries. But those restrictions did not limit the means for law abiding citizens to defend themselves. I wish Scalia had taken an extra page or two in Heller to get to that.

What "restrictions" where those? in the 1920s you could walk into a hardware store and buy a Thompson submachine gun.

And the federal govt outlawed Thompsons for private purchase. Funny how that worked, angry obscene child.

You said there were "restrictions in the 18th and 19th centuries." What were they?

Funny how you avoided answering my question.

 

[bripat9643]

Funny how our Founders didn't use the constitution and caselaw to fight the British

Apparently the British weren't like the liberal 'progressives' we have today... so enlightened & all....

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

I realize you believe truth is retarded. That's why you're a snowflake.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Funny how our Founders didn't use the constitution and caselaw to fight the British

Apparently the British weren't like the liberal 'progressives' we have today... so enlightened & all....

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

^ Still a moron.

 

[SavannahMann]

SavannahMan=Ammon Bundy is not in jail. All charges dismissed with prejudice. Why? The Government lied and cheated. Charges Against Bundys in Ranch Standoff Case Are Dismissed

So with literally two exceptions everyone who went to prison plead guilty. Those who pled not guilty went home with two exceptions. So what does that tell you?

First the Government was unwilling to end up playing the part of Custer at the re-enactment of the Little Bighorn, and two, they really were out to screw the Bundy’s. Now as for me I think the Bundy’s are assholes. But even assholes have rights. Which brings us back to you. How are you doing?

If the Bundys tried it again, there will be bloodshed and the militia scattered as ashes before the wind.

Unlikely. Let’s talk numbers. There are including Federal, State, County, and City, about three million cops total in the nation. There are probably that many Remington branded AR-15’s not to mention the dozen other makers.

How many cops would die? How many would face Veterans with training and experience more than equal to that of the cops?

You live in a tin foil world. Almost no veterans are going to join a rebellion against the country and constitution.

The neighbors would put the rebels against the wall in the back yard and leave them where they fell, before the LEO or the military ever showed up.

About half of the people at the Bundy Ranch were veterans. And what makes you think it would be against the Constitution? The people there believed that the Government was acting in an unconstitutional manner. They interpreted the Constitution differently than you do.

You are ignorant if you have never heard of the Oath Keepers. They are former military and cops . Oath Keepers

They are considered a hate group by the Pot stirring Southern Poverty Law Center.

The famed Michigan Militia of thirty years ago was led by a former Green Beret.

You really are ignorant aren’t you? Are you a veteran? Most of them see themselves as Patriots. If the active military was ordered to open fire on citizens about half would refuse. That would be higher in the special units. Paratroopers, Rangers, and the rest.

 

[bripat9643]

Apparently the British weren't like the liberal 'progressives' we have today... so enlightened & all....

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

^ Still a moron.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Apparently the British weren't like the liberal 'progressives' we have today... so enlightened & all....

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

I realize you believe truth is retarded. That's why you're a snowflake.

It's a retarded notion. No one is preventing you from doing anything you want to. You are only handicapped by the tyranny of your own ignorance.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Apparently the British weren't like the liberal 'progressives' we have today... so enlightened & all....

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

^ Still a moron.

Explain to us how we are less free today, professor.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Apparently the British weren't like the liberal 'progressives' we have today... so enlightened & all....

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

I realize you believe truth is retarded. That's why you're a snowflake.

Read the conversation you butted in to, dope.

 

[bripat9643]

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

I realize you believe truth is retarded. That's why you're a snowflake.

It's a retarded notion. No one is preventing you from doing anything you want to. You are only handicapped by the tyranny of your own ignorance.

Absolute horseshit. Can I buy health insurance that doesn't include maternity care? Can I buy a Thompson submachine gun? Can I build a house without getting permission from the local government?

My wife is a massage therapist. She had to spend 6 months going through a lengthy bureaucratic nightmare to get a license so she could practice her trade where we recently moved to. Is that your conception of freedom?

 

[bripat9643]

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

I realize you believe truth is retarded. That's why you're a snowflake.

Read the conversation you butted in to, dope.

How would that change the truth of what I posted, moron?

 

[bripat9643]

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

We had far more freedom under King George III than we do now.

^ Simply retarded.

No, it's irrefutable. How much did we pay in taxes to the crown? About 5% of our GDP. How much do we pay to government in taxes now? About 40%

^ Still retarded

^ Still a moron.

Explain to us how we are less free today, professor.

• Licensing laws.
• Drug laws.
• Building codes.
• Thousands of regulations on consumer products.
• Zoning.
• Environmental laws.
• Social Security
• Property taxes
• Medicare
• Obamacare
• TSA
• Banking regulations
• FISA
• NSA spying

To name a few.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

So what you're saying is that the government has a right to limit freedom of speech and religion ? The original intent was to limit government powers.

Huh? What the sam hill are you talking about? The argument on constitutional interpretation has been going on between legal scholars for well over a century. I favor the living constitution method over original intent.
`

We can find original intent in the founding fathers later writings,

 

[Windparadox]

We can find original intent in the founding fathers later writings,

Who is we? Have you had any law school?
`

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

We can find original intent in the founding fathers later writings,

Who is we? Have you had any law school?
`

Read the the damn writings even for those with half a brain it's fairly easy to understand what the original intent is.

 

[Windparadox]

amn writings even for those with half a brain it's fairly easy to understand what the original intent is.

So the answer is No. You're one of these online, constitutional experts. Whatever.
`