School Shooting at CT Elementary School

[brimic]

OK.....voting age at 25 unless you are active-duty or honorably discharged military....

Sweet! Then 18-24 year shouldn't have to pay taxes either.

It might be incredibly shocking to some people, but there are still a lot of 18-24 year olds in the trades, family businesses, or in business for themselves who are making good money, starting families, buying homes, and being productive contributors to society.
Those who join the Military are forced to grow up quickly on a normal expected timeline or on that track already, there are plenty of others who do it without the military.

[MillCreek]

OK.....voting age at 25 unless you are active-duty or honorably discharged military....

I don't think so.  At age 16, I was already serving as a volunteer firefighter and EMT, saving lives.  I was in paramedic training by the time I was 18 and saving more lives on a daily basis.  By age 20, I was a hazmat training officer for the state fire administration.  Was my service any less than Private Snuffy in the motor pool?

[seeker_two]

You people need to quit bringing facts into a purely emotional, knee-jerk reactionary discussion.....

If you want stats, then we should abolish women's suffrage for the sake of world peace....the US has been involved in more military actions since women started voting....

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

You people need to quit bringing facts into a purely emotional, knee-jerk reactionary discussion.....

If you want stats, then we should abolish women's suffrage for the sake of world peace....the US has been involved in more military actions since women started voting....

yes

[280plus]

It's always the women... 

[Strings]

Suffrage hell... we should have never given them shoes!

*ducks for cover*

[lupinus]

Suffrage hell... we should have never given them shoes!

*ducks for cover*

Shoes? We should have stopped at fig leaves

[kgbsquirrel]

Shoes? We should have stopped at fig leaves

Fig leaves!? Prude!   

[birdman]

Whoa, larry correia hit a home run with his blog post on this
Once again, I agree with him.

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

[MillCreek]

Whoa, larry correia hit a home run with his blog post on this
Once again, I agree with him.

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

This is one of the most cogently-written pieces on the subject that it has been my pleasure to read.  I especially respected how he stated up front that he was not a mental health expert, and would therefore not be commenting on that. 

[Perd Hapley]

Whoa, larry correia hit a home run with his blog post on this
Once again, I agree with him.

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

I had one individual tell me that these types of guns are designed to slaughter the maximum number of people possible as quickly as possible… Uh huh… Which is why every single police department in America uses them, because of all that slaughtering cops do daily. Cops use them for the same reason we do, they are handy, versatile, and can stop an attacker quickly in a variety of circumstances.

Exactly what I've been thinking the last few days.

Spare me the whole, “You won’t be happy until everybody has nuclear weapons” reductio ad absurdum. It says arms, as in things that were man portable. And as for the founding fathers not being able to see foresee our modern arms, you forget that many of them were inventors, and multi shot weapons were already in service. Not to mention that in that day, arms included cannon, since most of the original artillery of the Continental Army was privately owned.

Isn't he contradicting himself there?

[kgbsquirrel]

Isn't he contradicting himself there?

The cannon of the day were man portable, to an extent. A few burly fellows could pick up the tongue of a gun carriage and move it around as needed, and the cannons on ships would also moved into position by hand (albeit using the mechanical advantage of block and tackle). I suppose in that way they were all "man portable."

In modern terms a Russian ZPU-1 towed 14.5mm anti-aircraft heavy machine gun can be stripped down in 5 minutes and transported by 10 men on foot. We've encountered them in the mountains of Afghanistan where the Taliban strips them down, doesn't bother to bring the road wheels and other unnecessary towing parts, and hikes them up to a mountain top from which to shoot at FOB's and helicopters.

[SteveS]

Exactly what I've been thinking the last few days.


Isn't he contradicting himself there?

Kind of, but he may be saying if the FFs were ok with people having cannons, then we should be ok with machine guns, "assault rifles", and other similar weapons.

[Hawkmoon]

Kind of, but he may be saying if the FFs were ok with people having cannons, then we should be ok with machine guns, "assault rifles", and other similar weapons.

Tench Coxe of Pennsylvania, an anti-Federalist:

The power of the sword, say the minority..., is in the hands of Congress. My friends and countrymen, it is not so, for The powers of the sword are in the hands of the yeomanry of America from sixteen to sixty. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthright of Americans. The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but where, I trust in God, it will always remain, in the hands of the people.

The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

[Perd Hapley]

First he says that "arms" refers to things that are "man portable." Then he says that it includes cannon. Cannon aren't any more man-portable than some of the smaller nukes, are they? 


Mainly, I just don't see how "arms" has any limitations. When "arms" refers to weapons, it means weapons - no qualifications. 

[birdman]

First he says that "arms" refers to things that are "man portable." Then he says that it includes cannon. Cannon aren't any more man-portable than some of the smaller nukes, are they? 


Mainly, I just don't see how "arms" has any limitations. When "arms" refers to weapons, it means weapons - no qualifications. 

With basically a few (count on one hand) exceptions, nukes are not single-man portable, or really even separable into pieces that are.

Even the little baby ones are still unit loads of 70-100lbs or more,

[lee n. field]

First he says that "arms" refers to things that are "man portable." Then he says that it includes cannon. Cannon aren't any more man-portable than some of the smaller nukes, are they? 


Mainly, I just don't see how "arms" has any limitations. When "arms" refers to weapons, it means weapons - no qualifications. 

As we edge towards an old and thread consuming in house libertarian argument.

("Why shouldn't I have a nuke, if it's clean and only used against agressors and for earthmoving?")

[Fly320s]

As we edge towards an old and thread consuming in house libertarian argument.

("Why shouldn't I have a nuke, if it's clean and only used against agressors and for earthmoving?")

We'll compromise. No nukes. Hell, I'll even throw in biological and chemical weapons. Happy? 

[Perd Hapley]

With basically a few (count on one hand) exceptions, nukes are not single-man portable, or really even separable into pieces that are.

Even the little baby ones are still unit loads of 70-100lbs or more,

So, like a cannon then? 


Lee,

I'm not saying that the 2A protects a right to own nukes, just that "arms" means a whole lot more than small arms.

[kgbsquirrel]

So, like a cannon then? 


Lee,

I'm not saying that the 2A protects a right to own nukes, just that "arms" means a whole lot more than small arms.

Eh, I will. You just wont ever be able to afford one, and not due to government intervention. The parts are just damned expensive to refine and make.

I could fashion a crude Hiroshima yield (20KT) device with 50-60kg of of Oralloy (80% enriched U235). No neutron reflectors, no pit enrichment with deuterium and tritium, etc. (which would all allow me to make it far smaller and with less material), but damned if I could ever afford that much HEU on my salary. It just would never happen.

[280plus]

Just go around looking for donations. Start with Iran.

[AJ Dual]

Just go around looking for donations. Start with Iran.

I think the answer would be "nuke insurance" assuming one lived in such an an-cap/libertarian place.

You pay your premiums, call in a strike if needed, company verifies the need through satellites/drones, and if approved, theyr send a missile, off, or maybe the drone on scene drops it.

[Hawkmoon]

I think the answer would be "nuke insurance" assuming one lived in such an an-cap/libertarian place.

You pay your premiums, call in a strike if needed, company verifies the need through satellites/drones, and if approved, theyr send a missile, off, or maybe the drone on scene drops it.

I like how you think.

Since the navies of the world have co-opted us on piracy insurance, maybe you've identified a new market segment for APS to explore.

[RoadKingLarry]

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/default.php?cPath=22_106_665

[DustinD]

Does anyone know where to find statistics for gun sales by model? I am trying to figure out how common the AR15 platform is compared to other rifles.