5.3.18

NRA nonsense -

On contemplation, I changed this post to make a political statement, because what I had posted made no sense. Please consider the following  in the wake of the tragedy in Florida. An armed guard will have no chance against someone with an assault weapon..

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:

Lee Harvey Oswald was in police custody, surrounded by armed police, and still Jack Ruby killed him. Guess they needed armed Math Teachers, because you don't get away with anything in a math class.


 anyone saying armed teachers needs the following



Red

27 comments:

Joe said...

Red I love and usually enjoy your blog but you really should stick to subjects you know about. The Ar15' used in the school shooting are not assault rifles they are semi automatic weapons. Assault weapons are fully automatic and capable of emptying the entire magazine with 1 trigger pull, semi auto means 1 trigger pull 1 shot. Please don not join the mass hysteria being churned up by the lame stream media with partial info and half truths. The real shame here is we are not attending to the people who desperately need help and have cried out for help only to be ignored and over looked until they do something terrible. It is already illegal for the average citizen to purchase or own an assault rifle such as a M16 like the army uses. I am sorry if I offend anyone but this issue needs careful thought with intelligent action staring by using the correct terms for everything involved and not knee jerk reactions. I do not know if arming teachers is the answer but there are many more saying that then just the NRA, also I have heard reports of many teachers signing for for classes?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Red said...

I removed this comments links, as none were working on my computer.. Here, however, is what Clarence wrote
There are approximately 50 million (48 million rounded up) children and minors ages k to Grade 12 in the USA. Approximately 50 a year on average are the victims of school shootings. I'm sure you can run the percentages. It would be nice if, before turning your blog into a political arena where you can demonize the 40 percent of the country that owns guns and takes the Second Amendment of the US Constitution very seriously, you did some research. I"m not sure that "Gun Free Zones" are doing our students any favors, esp given the cowardice of the apparently 4 cops that were on the scene. By the way, semiautomatic guns are not machine guns, there are approximately 40 some million of these AR 15's in circulation, and all it would have taken is one well placed shot to have taken down this shooter contrary to your assertion that he was armed with some kind of Gatling gun.

Clarence

Anonymous said...

It may occur strange, but is it by chance that the US are a warmongering nation, armed to the teeth and still afraid of anybody?

The 2nd Amendment does not give anyone the right to bear arms.

And if any American can have his gun for safety, why can't North Korea a nuclear device too, just for safety?

Whenever I see another shooting in the news, I am like 'I told you so'.

Best wishes from a gun free Netherlands.

Marco (from Lindsay).

Joe said...

The US in not a warmongering nation but one that very much enjoys their constitutional freedoms. We are not afraid and the 2nd Amendment gives all Americans the right to bear arms if you know how to read. Our guns to not threaten other nations as do nuclear arms a very poor analogy. It is easy to sit back and judge from afar isn't it.

Red said...

The idea that the second amendment is a forever piece of government is simply wrong!
Prohibition was to be forever, but that was changed
Slavery was legal in many states, until a Civil War was needed to abolish it.

Joe: whether the person uses a semi-automatic, or a fully automatic, the reality is no one should be able to purchase these.

guns in classrooms has to be the most absurd reaction possible. A wonderful industry would develop of making these guns secure, and then people would find a way to get around the methods being used.

I will write whatever I choose on my blog, using wit(hopefully) against all things I dislike.

Clarence: HOW IN HELL CAN YOU THINK 50 SCHOOL CHILDREN KILLED BY GUNS IS ACCEPTABLE NUMBERS! DID THE GREATEST GENERATION FIGHT AGAINST Nazi GERMANY AND JAPAN SO CHILDREN CAN BE MURDERED AT HOME, AND IT IS ACCEPTABLE!
40 million gun holders (not certain where you got that number, but their are 323 million people in the USA, so slightly more than 12% own guns. THE MAJORITY CAN CHANGE LAWS, AND SPECIALLY AMENDMENTS.
Do you honestly think every teacher would use a gun, instead of hiding. A few would, but not everyone.
I can now see the professional days being used to TEACH how to use a gun in an emergency!
Better to spend limited school district money on food programs for children coming to school without breakfast.

Marco ; thanks for your comment.... interesting analogy of an individual gun owner versus a nation like North Korea. America's invasion of Iraq has been a total disaster.

Joe: it is an amendment, not a natural God given right. Amendments can be changed. Vietnam, Iraq, seem to suggest that, unfortunately, the nation has somewhat changed.
However, the armed forces are needed, otherwise human nature will have other countries invading other countries.
Now, Vietnam is a tourist hot spot for everyone.
Iraq had a dictator removed, replaced by ISIS. Not such a good move.
Fun to watch the movie American Made (Tom Cruise movie), and see how politicians can cause more problems than solutions.
The second amendment, that was never a problem in the 1960 's and 1970's, is now a PROBLEM!
Red

me said...

Hey Red knock it off. You are not going to sway anyone. Everyone of those mass shooters is a registered dem. And most were taking mental health drugs. I say that's the problem physical dems. But wait, isn't that an oxymorn?

smuccatelli said...

Wow. There's some pretty stupid shit being asserted here. I hate to disagree so vehemently with you and I hope you understand the spirit in which my remarks are intended. If you don't,so be it...

Numero Uno: The Bill of Rights were considered by the Founders (the guys that wrote the Constitution) as enumerations of "God-given rights, not things permitted or granted by government.

Numero Two-o: The Second Amendment is and remains a "forever piece of government" until it is amended or repealed. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Prohibition, properly, was a Constitutional Amendment and was repealed thirteen years later because it caused such a clusterfuck that if proved disastrous. Slavery legal but the Civil War did not end it. The Thirteenth Amendment did. The difference between slavery and Prohibition and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" is that the first two were repealed and the Second Amendment hasn't been. That's how it works here. As to whether someone shouldn't "be able to purchase these", that's YOUR opinion and is based on feelings not logic.

Numero Three-o: Clarence, I think some of your numbers are suspect, but then gun-control is a very contentious issue. I think, for example that 40 million gun owners is decidedly on the low side. It's more like well over 100 million. And most gun owners own more than one gun. That number (guns in private hands) generally held to be 300 to 350 million. And Red: It's WAY more than 12 percent of the population. Yes, the majority CAN change laws but amending the Constitution is nowhere near as easy as you seem to think it is. In our entire history, the Constitution has only been amended 27 times. The first ten were the Bill of Rights and the Eighteenth (Prohibition) was repealed by the Twenty-First, effectively cancelling each other out.

Numero Four-o: Marco, the Second Amendment most assuredly DOES guarantee all Americans the right to keep and bear arms, whether you approve or not. Google it...

Peace out...

Anonymous said...

What's the matter red? Scared to print my earlier comment? I bet your mail is running 90+% telling you to keep your liberal mouth shut and stick to the one topic you are good at.

Joe said...

The second amendment is only a problem because it is easier to blame a that than face the truth. The real trouble we have in this country is the lack of personal accountability. Saying no one should be allowed to purchase any weapon ie what is completely unrealistic. There are millions of responsible gun owners who have saved and protected many more people.

Red said...

smuccatelli: You are correct, but I think it is you who is saying a lot of shit.

IF you are a Christian, remember the wars that were fought between Protestants and Catholics. Now the Shia and the Sunni muslims are willing to kill each other over there rivaling interpretations of the Koran. Mankind has altered even the word of GOD in Christian beliefs, because in the light of today, and today's environment... it just makes sense. You are no longer permitted slaves, as a simple example.

Many of the framers of the constitution were slave holders, stating that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. Would any of the slave holders be voted in to office now, if they were alive and slave holders.

Opinions change, society changes, as progress propels us forward. The guns of the second amendment era are not the guns of today.

number one: we do not have GOD GIVEN RIGHTS, only laws created by men, and hopefully now being created by men AND WOMEN.

number two: WE AGREE. IT is a law that can be changed. Being anti _Trump, he has many faults, and some big pluses.
Maybe, just maybe, something positive will come from his meeting (if it happens) with the leader of North Korea.
Maybe, just maybe, he will see the wisdom of demanding some changes to the law regarding types of firearms, and prohibitions on who can own them. Example: People is jail do not have firearms. He can demand or initiate some REASONABLE CHANGES THAT EVERYONE CAN AGREE WITH. He is NOT completely tied to one political idea.
number 3: I agree. I think Clarence's numbers at suspect, There are roughly 300 million guns in the United States—nearly enough for each citizen to own one. But those guns are concentrated in the hands of a minority of Americans. Nearly a third of adults owns a gun, according to a new study in the journal Injury Prevention."
number 4: yes, it does, but it can be changed, or altered.
God given right to bear arms... the bible I have read does not say it is a god given right.... and then again..which god, from which era...

keep smiling...
Do you own a gun?
IF yes: Why?

bottoms up
Red

Red said...

Joe; I agree that there are millions of responsible gun owners. I also agree with personal accountability, which is very much lacking in society.
I also agree that saying no one can purchase guns is unrealistic, but putting waiting periods, and background checks help us weed out just a little of the crazies. It takes longer to get a license to drive a car than to purchase a semi-automatic gun. That needs to change.
bottoms up
Red

Red said...

ME: I know I will not change many people's mind, but the more you make people think, the better the outcome.
Sadly, I have no idea how you can say all the shooters are Democrats.
I did not post this for a little while, because of the simple ignorant made up shit!!!!
cheers
red

Red said...

Hi Anon: You give my blog way to much importance to think many people post comments. yours is the last comment I have received, and I can only conclude that you forgot to sign in as ME to send this.
You lose your bet.... this was all of the comments...
Do you own a gun, and if so why? Red

smuccatelli said...

"IF you are a Christian, remember the wars that were fought between Protestants and Catholics. Now the Shia and the Sunni muslims are willing to kill each other over there rivaling interpretations of the Koran. Mankind has altered even the word of GOD in Christian beliefs, because in the light of today, and today's environment... it just makes sense. You are no longer permitted slaves, as a simple example."

Uhhh... WHAT? When did I mention any of that?

"Many of the framers of the constitution were slave holders, stating that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL."

"All men are created equal" is a line from the Declaration of Independence and, as such, has no force of law, though it IS an excellent philosophy.

"Would any of the slave holders be voted in to office now, if they were alive and slave holders."

Well no... For one thing, they'd be ANCIENT and for another, slave owning is no longer legal...

"Opinions change, society changes, as progress propels us forward. The guns of the second amendment era are not the guns of today."

Opinions may change, but, in this case, the law HASN'T (the SA still has the full force of law). As for the guns of the "Second Amendment era", yup, they're quite different. As far as that goes, the "freedom of speech" and the "freedom of the press" in the First Amendment "era" have changed greatly (the only way to "broadcast" speech back in the Eighteenth Century was to shout very loudly). Does that mean that those protections are only applied to literal speech and broadsheets and pamphlets printed on paper with actual ink? Does the Fourth Amendment's protections against, say, unlawful search and seizure (without a search warrant) only protect against your house or does it apply to your mail, email, phone records, bank records, medical records, et al?

"number one: we do not have GOD GIVEN RIGHTS, only laws created by men, and hopefully now being created by men AND WOMEN."

Okay. Let's call them NATURAL rights. Same thing. Still have a problem with the concept?

smuccatelli said...

"number two: WE AGREE. IT is a law that can be changed. Being anti _Trump, he has many faults, and some big pluses.
Maybe, just maybe, something positive will come from his meeting (if it happens) with the leader of North Korea.
Maybe, just maybe, he will see the wisdom of demanding some changes to the law regarding types of firearms, and prohibitions on who can own them. Example: People is jail do not have firearms. He can demand or initiate some REASONABLE CHANGES THAT EVERYONE CAN AGREE WITH. He is NOT completely tied to one political idea."

Okay, this one is going take some time. First, I NEVER even mentioned Trump in my reply. You seem to think that it's up to him to "do something". Presidents cannot MAKE law. Only Congress can do that. He CAN use the "bully pulpit" (as Teddy Roosevelt used to call it) to effect some influence on Congress, but that's no guarantee of getting what he wants. He's STILL trying to end Obamacare and "fix" immigration, for instance and not having too much success. It's really not up to him, even if he thinks so. Or even if YOU do...

"number 3: I agree. I think Clarence's numbers at suspect, There are roughly 300 million guns in the United States—nearly enough for each citizen to own one. But those guns are concentrated in the hands of a minority of Americans. Nearly a third of adults owns a gun, according to a new study in the journal Injury Prevention."

"But those gun are concentrated in the hands of a minority of Americans". So what? First, you yourself say it's "nearly a third". That's a SIZEABLE minority, one backed by a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. That's one reason we have a Constitutional Republic and not a "democracy"; to protect against the "tyranny of the majority". Some rights are NOT negotiable...

"number 4: yes, it does, but it can be changed, or altered."

Well, finally you agree with me... ;-)

"God given right to bear arms... the bible I have read does not say it is a god given right.... and then again..which god, from which era..."

That's quite an equivocation. I don't think they guns in the Bible, did they? There IS however, what might be called a God-given right to self-defense and defense of one's family and property. Even Jesus said: "Let he who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one". And again, even if it's not "God-given", it's surely a NATURAL one...

"Do you own a gun?"

Not at the moment. Had to sell all mine due to financial need (all 27 of them).

"IF yes: Why?" Because I LIKE guns. And I have a right to own them. Can't wait to get another one...

Keep smiling... :-)

By the way, I had to reply in two parts because your reply software only allows 4096 characters...

Red said...

hi: The limits on freedom of speech in what you write here are decided by Google. I had no idea that a limit existed, but it does seem reasonable, as simply another comment can be added, so multiple comments can permit anything to be posted.

I do not agree that it is a natural right to own a gun. IT is a right granted by the government, and can be changed by the government.

What do you think of such minor changes in Florida that most politicians there are claiming to be a wonderful improvement/
bottoms up

Red

smuccatelli said...

I had no idea of the limitations either, until I tried to post my reply. It's not a major hassle, as you say, just a pain in the ass...

"I do not agree that it is a natural right to own a gun. IT is a right granted by the government, and can be changed by the government."

I believe you're not American, right? Our Constitution says different, and such "natural" rights (as embodied in the Bill of Rights) are not "granted" by government, but are enumerated. In effect, the Bill of Rights are laws constraining the Federal government and telling it what in may NOT do to us, the People. I know it may be hard to grasp for someone who's used to the government doing whatever it wants, but that's the reason we fought that pesky old Revolutionary War. And again in 1812...

The changes in Florida are acceptable to me, except perhaps for a waiting period of three days. It's already Federal law that the "instant check" system has up to three days delay built in if there's any questions raised by the check itself before the dealer has to give the gun to the purchaser. The 21 year minimum age limit is OK by me since I'm literally three times that age. Of course there's no ban on "assault weapons" or "high-capacity" magazines and that is what the gun restrictionists really wanted. From their standpoint, it's a big fail. And all I can say to that is: GOOD!

Joe said...

First Red let me say after reading some of the other comments I mean you no dis respect and only wish to have an intelligent debate and as you say discussion can open some minds. Obviously I believe it is ok to own guns and I do mainly to enjoy target shooting but also believe in proper training and handling. My entire family shares in the sport and our guns have never injured a living creature. Also I also believe better regulations are needed (not more laws just better) in the purchasing of all weapons as it is too easy to buy a weapon without any background checks at all. I see no problem with raising the age to 21 with full back ground checks and a waiting period to keep people who should not own a weapon from getting one. As to the number of weapons out there no one really knows how many there are with how many people. I know of many guns brought home from wars as souvenirs and others passed down thru the generations which were never registered.

Red said...

smuccatelli; I also think the changes in Florida are a nothing.... and that is unfortunate and Sad.
time to give this a rest, because neither of us will change the others opinion. (however, I will post things that are not to everyone's liking
bottoms up
Red

Red said...

Joe: We tend to agree on some points and I agree with your points in this comment. Except, I doubt a spanking blog will change anyone's mind except regarding spanking and other sexual ideas.
I will still post about things, but let us give this one a rest.
bottoms up
Red

smuccatelli said...

Uh, just one more thing... (does that conjure memories of the old "Columbo" series starring Peter Falk?). I'm not the one who criticized you for posting about this. I merely responded to your (and others) posts...
Freedom of speech! (I think we can both agree on that...) ;-)

Red said...

smuccatelli: no problem my friend, and sorry for confusing myself. discussion is always fun
Red

Anonymous said...

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1823016659

Anonymous said...

Leave it to a first world country to protest against their own rights. The problem isn't guns and never has been. We had guns in the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s... and no mass shootings. Something in our culture has changed, and until we find what it is, taking away guns from honest citizens is not going to fix the problem, because people who really want guns, and especially criminals, will get them anyway.

Red said...

a very well written description...
bottoms up
Red

Red said...

I left this anon comment, because it is simply so sad. These are not the guns of the 40's and 50's, that people owned then. Yes, society has changed, and with it, LAWS MUST CHANGE.
Every other major country does not have the problem that America has, and does NOT have the laws that permit this, like America does.
Red