So what IS the best way to reduce or prevent mass shootings?

[2aguy]

final point. The main reason why Hitler got away with murder?

Because those nice capitalists in the west and the politicians they owned were more scared of Stalin than they were of Hitler and Mussolini.

Stalin was threatening to take away their mansions, just like he did in Russia!!!

So all Hitler had to do was say, "I'm against the Communists!" and the west let him do pretty much whatever he wanted. Even after he invaded Poland, they did nothing. Until he turned on them.

After their militaries were defeated because they prepared for the last war, while Germany created a military for the next war, the civilian populations were unarmed in the face of occupation….they had ignored the reasons you need an armed population….

Reason for guns...criminals, the dangerously mentally ill, government inability to protect, government murder

 

[2aguy]

final point. The main reason why Hitler got away with murder?

Because those nice capitalists in the west and the politicians they owned were more scared of Stalin than they were of Hitler and Mussolini.

Stalin was threatening to take away their mansions, just like he did in Russia!!!

So all Hitler had to do was say, "I'm against the Communists!" and the west let him do pretty much whatever he wanted. Even after he invaded Poland, they did nothing. Until he turned on them.

They did nothing because they were all pacifists terrified that any counter to hitler would lead to war…so they all let him gobble up country after country until it was too late to stop him...

 

[candycorn]

Thanks. I'll accept your surrender that the Government can inflate the price of weapons artificially without violating the Constitution.

Just as I will accept your admission that "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members" and "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons" are nut found in anywhere in the constitution and are thus invalid.

The word Militia is in the amendment for a reason.

I accept your surrender, that the Constitution does not state "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members"" and/or "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons".
Good to see you know your place, puppy..

I assume you'll also accept it when the Court finally gets around to cleaning up the monthly bloodbaths by re-examining why the Framers put the word in there? Am I right?

They already addressed that issue. Interesting how you only consider the Supreme Court to be the last word when it's a word you like.

FYI, there is nothing about the Second Amendment that enables "monthly bloodbaths", dumbass.

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons. Once Hillary is installed as President, Scalia succumbs to Father Time as we all eventually will, and she installs some center-left jurists...we'll see the amendment re-examined.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Just as I will accept your admission that "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members" and "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons" are nut found in anywhere in the constitution and are thus invalid.

The word Militia is in the amendment for a reason.

I accept your surrender, that the Constitution does not state "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members"" and/or "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons".
Good to see you know your place, puppy..

I assume you'll also accept it when the Court finally gets around to cleaning up the monthly bloodbaths by re-examining why the Framers put the word in there? Am I right?

They already addressed that issue. Interesting how you only consider the Supreme Court to be the last word when it's a word you like.

FYI, there is nothing about the Second Amendment that enables "monthly bloodbaths", dumbass.

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons.

Please cite the text of the constitution that says this.
Oh wait... you won't because you can't.
You lose, puppy. Again.

 

[candycorn]

The word Militia is in the amendment for a reason.

I accept your surrender, that the Constitution does not state "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members"" and/or "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons".
Good to see you know your place, puppy..

I assume you'll also accept it when the Court finally gets around to cleaning up the monthly bloodbaths by re-examining why the Framers put the word in there? Am I right?

They already addressed that issue. Interesting how you only consider the Supreme Court to be the last word when it's a word you like.

FYI, there is nothing about the Second Amendment that enables "monthly bloodbaths", dumbass.

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons.

Please cite the text of the constitution that says this.
Oh wait... you won't because you can't.
You lose, puppy. Again.

The word Militia is there for a reason. You'll have to be pretty stupid to think the framers were just putting random words into the amendments.

Get used to it (or join a militia). The court's job is to correct the other branches. The correction is coming. All we need is HRC in the oval and the Dems to re-take Congress (and political will to do it which is always suspect at best).

 

[M14 Shooter]

I accept your surrender, that the Constitution does not state "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members"" and/or "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons".
Good to see you know your place, puppy..

I assume you'll also accept it when the Court finally gets around to cleaning up the monthly bloodbaths by re-examining why the Framers put the word in there? Am I right?

They already addressed that issue. Interesting how you only consider the Supreme Court to be the last word when it's a word you like.

FYI, there is nothing about the Second Amendment that enables "monthly bloodbaths", dumbass.

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons.

Please cite the text of the constitution that says this.
Oh wait... you won't because you can't.
You lose, puppy. Again.

The word Militia is there for a reason.

Glad to see you still understand that you are wrong.

 

[candycorn]

I assume you'll also accept it when the Court finally gets around to cleaning up the monthly bloodbaths by re-examining why the Framers put the word in there? Am I right?

They already addressed that issue. Interesting how you only consider the Supreme Court to be the last word when it's a word you like.

FYI, there is nothing about the Second Amendment that enables "monthly bloodbaths", dumbass.

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons.

Please cite the text of the constitution that says this.
Oh wait... you won't because you can't.
You lose, puppy. Again.

The word Militia is there for a reason.

Glad to see you still understand that you are wrong.

So was the guy who said the Seahawks never won a Super Bowl back in the 1990's. Things change. One thing that doesn't is the amendment's wording....the word Militia is in there for a reason....

 

[M14 Shooter]

They already addressed that issue. Interesting how you only consider the Supreme Court to be the last word when it's a word you like.

FYI, there is nothing about the Second Amendment that enables "monthly bloodbaths", dumbass.

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons.

Please cite the text of the constitution that says this.
Oh wait... you won't because you can't.
You lose, puppy. Again.

The word Militia is there for a reason.

Glad to see you still understand that you are wrong.

So was the guy who said the Seahawks never won a Super Bowl back in the 1990's. Things change. One thing that doesn't is the amendment's wording....the word Militia is in there for a reason....

Nothing here changes the fact that you know you are wrong.

 

[candycorn]

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons.

Please cite the text of the constitution that says this.
Oh wait... you won't because you can't.
You lose, puppy. Again.

The word Militia is there for a reason.

Glad to see you still understand that you are wrong.

So was the guy who said the Seahawks never won a Super Bowl back in the 1990's. Things change. One thing that doesn't is the amendment's wording....the word Militia is in there for a reason....

Nothing here changes the fact that you know you are wrong.

Coming from you that is pretty weak...but then again from what I hear that is the way you roll, right micro-penis?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Please cite the text of the constitution that says this.
Oh wait... you won't because you can't.
You lose, puppy. Again.

The word Militia is there for a reason.

Glad to see you still understand that you are wrong.

So was the guy who said the Seahawks never won a Super Bowl back in the 1990's. Things change. One thing that doesn't is the amendment's wording....the word Militia is in there for a reason....

Nothing here changes the fact that you know you are wrong.

Coming from you that is pretty weak...but then again from what I hear that is the way you roll, right micro-penis?

Nothing here changes the fact that you know you are wrong.

 

[Esmeralda]

Something I wrote in 2007 after another mass murder then. As true now as it was then.

I say, since we have the 'right to bear arms' then sell 'em to people, but do not sell ammunition. Make ammunition illegal. Possession of it, selling of it, etc. They can have all the guns they want, but they can't kill anyone with them because they will have no ammunition.

In the same way pipes and so forth are legal to own for smoking pot, but the pot is not legal to possess, sell or buy.

It won't eliminate gun violence, but it will lessen it a lot.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Something I wrote in 2007 after another mass murder then. As true now as it was then.

I say, since we have the 'right to bear arms' then sell 'em to people, but do not sell ammunition. Make ammunition illegal.

Sure -- because that won't violate the constitution or anything.

 

[Rustic]

Just as I will accept your admission that "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members" and "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons" are nut found in anywhere in the constitution and are thus invalid.

The word Militia is in the amendment for a reason.

I accept your surrender, that the Constitution does not state "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members"" and/or "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons".
Good to see you know your place, puppy..

I assume you'll also accept it when the Court finally gets around to cleaning up the monthly bloodbaths by re-examining why the Framers put the word in there? Am I right?

They already addressed that issue. Interesting how you only consider the Supreme Court to be the last word when it's a word you like.

FYI, there is nothing about the Second Amendment that enables "monthly bloodbaths", dumbass.

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons. Once Hillary is installed as President, Scalia succumbs to Father Time as we all eventually will, and she installs some center-left jurists...we'll see the amendment re-examined.

If that happens the blood shed will be so great, this country will not survive it... And rightly so.

Not too long ago I thought succession was crazy... It's sounding better and better every time it comes up.

 

[Esmeralda]

Something I wrote in 2007 after another mass murder then. As true now as it was then.

I say, since we have the 'right to bear arms' then sell 'em to people, but do not sell ammunition. Make ammunition illegal.

Sure -- because that won't violate the constitution or anything.

The Constitution doesn't say anything about ammunition.

 

[Rustic]

Something I wrote in 2007 after another mass murder then. As true now as it was then.

I say, since we have the 'right to bear arms' then sell 'em to people, but do not sell ammunition. Make ammunition illegal.

Sure -- because that won't violate the constitution or anything.

The Constitution doesn't say anything about ammunition.

Buy more guns and ammo...

 

[M14 Shooter]

Something I wrote in 2007 after another mass murder then. As true now as it was then.

I say, since we have the 'right to bear arms' then sell 'em to people, but do not sell ammunition. Make ammunition illegal.

Sure -- because that won't violate the constitution or anything.

The Constitution doesn't say anything about ammunition.

Not even you are so stupid to believe that, in terms of the 2nd Amendment, firearms and their ammunition are independent from one another.

 

[Little-Acorn]

I say, since we have the 'right to bear arms' then sell 'em to people, but do not sell ammunition. Make ammunition illegal. Possession of it, selling of it, etc. They can have all the guns they want, but they can't kill anyone with them because they will have no ammunition.

"Arms" includes ammo, obviously.

Nice try.

(It's amazing how stupid liberals need normal Americans to be, to believe that the Framers didn't mean to include gunpowder, bullets etc. in their definition of "arms".)

 

[Rustic]

I say, since we have the 'right to bear arms' then sell 'em to people, but do not sell ammunition. Make ammunition illegal. Possession of it, selling of it, etc. They can have all the guns they want, but they can't kill anyone with them because they will have no ammunition.

"Arms" includes ammo, obviously.

Nice try.

(yawn)

Ya, buy more guns and ammo...

 

[Cecilie1200]

Just as I will accept your admission that "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members" and "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons" are nut found in anywhere in the constitution and are thus invalid.

The word Militia is in the amendment for a reason.

I accept your surrender, that the Constitution does not state "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members"" and/or "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons".
Good to see you know your place, puppy..

I assume you'll also accept it when the Court finally gets around to cleaning up the monthly bloodbaths by re-examining why the Framers put the word in there? Am I right?

They already addressed that issue. Interesting how you only consider the Supreme Court to be the last word when it's a word you like.

FYI, there is nothing about the Second Amendment that enables "monthly bloodbaths", dumbass.

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons. Once Hillary is installed as President, Scalia succumbs to Father Time as we all eventually will, and she installs some center-left jurists...we'll see the amendment re-examined.

No, Noah Webster. There is nothing about the first clause that in any way modifies or restricts the second clause. Learn to read English.

Only a leftist would refer to a politician as being "installed", and actually be okay with that viewpoint.

Of course, only a leftist would happily talk about a plan to "reinterpret" people's rights out of existence illegally. Literally the only thing that supports your view that individuals do not have the right to own guns is the fact that you don't want them to, and that's more than enough for you to forcibly remake the world to suit you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I accept your surrender, that the Constitution does not state "gun ownership is to be limited to Militia members"" and/or "if you're not a member of the Militia, you are not constitutionally allowed to carry weapons".
Good to see you know your place, puppy..

I assume you'll also accept it when the Court finally gets around to cleaning up the monthly bloodbaths by re-examining why the Framers put the word in there? Am I right?

They already addressed that issue. Interesting how you only consider the Supreme Court to be the last word when it's a word you like.

FYI, there is nothing about the Second Amendment that enables "monthly bloodbaths", dumbass.

No kidding. It calls for a Militia to have weapons.

Please cite the text of the constitution that says this.
Oh wait... you won't because you can't.
You lose, puppy. Again.

The word Militia is there for a reason. You'll have to be pretty stupid to think the framers were just putting random words into the amendments.

Get used to it (or join a militia). The court's job is to correct the other branches. The correction is coming. All we need is HRC in the oval and the Dems to re-take Congress (and political will to do it which is always suspect at best).

The word "militia" is there, as I said before while you were , to clarify a reason why THE PEOPLE (aka individual citizens) should have an uninfringed right to keep and bear arms, a reason that is not already mentioned or implied elsewhere.

Not a modifying clause. Nothing is going to change the rules of English.