U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:00 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
5,756 posts, read 7,611,767 times
Reputation: 7586

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
What do you expect to be done?

Seriously, if there was a solution to this things would be done.
Obviously there are things that can be done, but no one in authority wants to take the initiative.
This gun issues has been beat to death, and still, many like me, see a solution, but the solution will never happen, because from day one, people have interpreted the 2nd amendment so it coincides with their wants, not as the rule was meant to be.

First let me quote from the federalist papers for those who think it was "the people" who had the right to bear arms, and no one else, then I will state further , after that quote.


Quote:
Federalist No. 36.

Hamilton states that a well-regulated (efficient) militia composed of the people will be more uniform and beneficial to the "public defense" of Americans. He argues that an excessively large militia can harm a nation's work force, as not everyone can leave their profession to go through military exercises. Thus, a smaller, but still well-regulated militia, is the answer. In the end, Hamilton concludes that the militia, as it is constituted directly of the people and managed by the states, is not a danger to liberty when called into use by other states to do things such as quell insurrections.

This statement by Hamilton serves to back up what I stated I believe the true intention of the 2nd was, to freely arm the people of a militia, not the general public.
In more understandable terms, the people(general population) could be called up to form a militia, and those people who are now a militia, would have the right to bear arms.
Again, read the paragraph, especially what he states about a "large militia".
He is talking about "people of a militia, not the general public.
The 2nd was reserved for members who would join a militia.

The second part of the amendment states "the people's right to bear arms, shall not be infringed".

Again, reading from Hamilton in the federalist papers, it is more than clear the "people" mentioned in the second sentence of the amendment were people who make up a militia.

Now,the solution to this gun issue is somewhat like a prescription that you doctor has prescribed for you.
When you read the literature that accompanies your medication, this is usually stated in that literature, "your doctor has weighed the evidence, and feels the benefits outweigh the risk involved".

For far to long, we are being bombarded with news of mass shootings, and the problem is never going to go away on it's own.
The sensible solution is to ban ALL firearms in the country, and those who think they could get away with having even one, would face the death penalty, ordered by the courts.

Again," the benefits outweigh the risk".
Looking back Hamilton's words above, it would appear the 2nd was aimed at the people who would form a militia, not the general public, so the general public should not have been armed in the first place.
Disarming the public,with death as the penalty for not conforming to the law, would certainly put an end to violence with firearms as the weapon of choice.

Only a tough policy as this will be effective.
People may try and use alternate weapons as a means to kill many at one time, and as with firearms, they too will be banned.

It is obvious that nothing has worked to date to end the carnage, so it is time stiffer measures were taken.

Perhaps the end result will be , the 2nd amendment will be repealed, if these mass killings continue unabated, and a new, reworded amendment takes it's place, more in line with what the framers intended.

I don't believe fort one minute, the framers intended to have the general population armed.
Not in their wildest imagination could they have foreseen a population in access of 300,000,000 people being armed.

Bob.

 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:01 PM
 
300 posts, read 243,053 times
Reputation: 380
All - Please consider joining the Brady Campaign to end gun violence
 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:01 PM
 
Location: Riverside County / Maricopa County
2,496 posts, read 1,801,670 times
Reputation: 1916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
I wonder if any of the guys who surmised that the Garlic Festival mass shooting was caused by the no-gun policy on the grounds will show their face in this thread?
I was wondering the same thing, California got mocked heavily in that now deleted thread. I wonder if those same loudmouths will post here, Im thinking not. I wonder why?
 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:01 PM
 
Location: Barrington
46,705 posts, read 34,397,082 times
Reputation: 15515
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow View Post
Open carry is still optional, it's not like the gov. forces people to carry weapons. Just because a state respects the rights of it's people to defend themselves doesn't mean there's going to be a well armed person in every situation that ever happens.

When the details come out and we find out that every single person shot in that store was legally carrying a firearm and not a single person was able to defend themselves then get back to me.
Only thing certain is that some people in the store were openly or concealed carrying at the time this shooting began. They likely ran for their lives with everyone else.


Nearly impossible to distinguish good vs bad guys with guns in the midst of chaos.
 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Austin
12,362 posts, read 7,039,857 times
Reputation: 13674
I attended a rock concert at a downtown venue a week ago and made a mental note of where the exits were in case of a terrorist attack while waiting for the group to perform. That scenario had never entered my mind before last week.

What scary times we live in....
 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:03 PM
 
Location: The South
5,320 posts, read 3,691,929 times
Reputation: 8081
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein View Post
Is Walmart a gun free zone?
Have you ever visited a Walmart?
 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:04 PM
 
11,732 posts, read 8,548,682 times
Reputation: 7216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
I wonder if any of the guys who surmised that the Garlic Festival mass shooting was caused by the no-gun policy on the grounds will show their face in this thread?
There was security all over Gilroy. Bet there's a no gun policy at WalMart. Most stores in Houston have a no firearms sign at the entrance. Won't stop the ones in a handbag.

But in the heat of the moment a citizens who pulls out a weapon to stop a shooter could also be mistaken for a shooter.
 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Barrington
46,705 posts, read 34,397,082 times
Reputation: 15515
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
A post on twitter claims it's a mentally ill guy named Scotty Mendez

Too common for people to intentionally misidentify suspects on social media.
 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:05 PM
 
Location: In your head, rent free
14,622 posts, read 7,825,064 times
Reputation: 7462
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
Only thing certain is that some people in the store were openly or concealed carrying at the time this shooting began. They likely ran for their lives with everyone else.


Nearly impossible to distinguish good vs bad guys with guns in the midst of chaos.
How is any of that certain?
 
Old 08-03-2019, 02:06 PM
 
12,721 posts, read 10,616,672 times
Reputation: 17747
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATX Wahine View Post
I hope you all patted yourself on the back after wasting no time making light of a tragedy. You clever kids, you.
The only ones making light of tragedies are those who bury their heads in the sand, repeat the same platitudes every time 20 people at one random location get shot dead for no reason, and want to do nothing to address the actual issues: mental illness and too easy access to guns in many states, in the vast majority of mass shooting cases.

Mass shootings are unfortunately now so common that many aren't shocked by them anymore. Hence some of the reactions, which I didn't even take as making light but as mere exasperation with what is now so common. People are sick of this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
We are all damned sick and tired of these mass shootings and of congress and trump doing NOTHING! Thoughts and prayers are not working.
Trump is one branch of three in the federal government. The Second Amendment is a federal amendment but states have some freedom in enforcing it, being as strict or not strict - to a point - as they want. Other than altering the Amendment - which only Congress can do - or creating some constitutional federal law on - which Congress has to do - I don't really see what can be done at the federal level. Trump really can't do anything, neither can any president.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top