Charleston (USA) Shooting

[guzzi]

The extent of the disintegration of the US along racial lines since obama was elected by an electorate more intent on proving they were not racist than proving they were not fools has been quite startling. I believe that there is a race war more than likely to erupt soon indeed it may already have started.

This may or may not be an incident in that war but no doubt many people will read it as that. There have been a great many black on white incidents recently that have been played down it was inevitable that sooner or later someone emotionally fragile would do something.

Now it'll be only a matter of time before the negros, half breeds, and their hangers on will respond.

It is and always will be impossible to make people like other people, especially those of a different breed.

There is a very great deal to be said in favour of non oppressive or exploitive apartheid, a very great deal more than to be said against it, and yes, I am being serious.

The BBC has been reporting very similar views voiced by Dylaan Roof not long before he shot all the people in church. Better to restrict access to firearms, really, isn't it?

[rmanx]

 

 

Now to me, the context is clearly the protection the idea of a people's militia, not the protection of the individual right to bear arms. The concept of a people's militia belongs to the era of Paul Revere and not to modern times. The modern US military so vastly outweighs the firepower jealously guarded by the gun-owning citizen that any idea of preservation of freedom by a citizen militia is ludicrous. The milita referred to in the second amendment has evolved into the regular armed forces and into the armed police forces.

No. The Second Amendment is there to protect the people from their own government, to maintain a free republic and as an insurance policy against tyranny. The Second Amendment is a right of each individual citizen, not a generic right of a collective to national self-defence. Adolf Hitler also was against guns which is why he selectively used gun control laws to disarm Jews before he went and murdered millions of them. The ways Jews just went to their deaths without fighting is a fine example of why free people should be armed. The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising further proves the point - they kicked the Nazis' backsides and showed what a free people can do when they are being attacked and have guns to defend themselves.

But of course it patentlly does not protect the people from their government, for the reason that I gave. The government has at its disposal resources and firepower that would allow it to overcome the citizenship armed or not.

 

The second amendment used to have a clause which was quite telling, because it provided for conscientious objection by persons with religious convictions. Now if it was referring to an individual right to bear arms, rather than to the establishment of a militia, that would not have been necessary, would it?

 

The interpretation has varied over the years. The Supreme Court has in the past determined that the second amendment refers to an institutional right to bear arms, not an individual one. Subsequently, it took the opposite view.

 

 

The second amendment is a nut jobs wet dream. Permission to own as much firepower as you can get away with.

 

Certain Americans have this romantic notion of them fighting off guberment troops deploying from black helicopters to take them off to FEMA death camps.

 

But, don't you worry. Ol'Jim Bob has his AK, a drum mag, a copy of PlayBoy in his back pocket, and the Stars'n'Strips wrapped around his patriotic shoulders.

 

Whilst in reality if the government thought he was that much of a threat, they would just drone strike his arse back to the stone age.

 

The "if they had been armed, no-one would have died" camp are wetting themselves, theorycrafting how they would have killed the bad guy in lickedy split time with no civilian casualties.

 

As has had been said before, the 2nd Amendment should be amended to take into account the availablility of firearms and their capabilities. Maybe that would stop the carnage (120ish mass shootings this year alone...so far).

[Isaac]

The Second Amendment is an insurance policy to safeguard the other twenty six.

[rmanx]

The Second Amendment is an insurance policy to safeguard the other twenty six.

 

Didn't safe guard the 120ish mass shootings this year.

[Isaac]

 

The Second Amendment is an insurance policy to safeguard the other twenty six.

 

Didn't safe guard the 120ish mass shootings this year.

 

 

I don't see any connection.

[rmanx]

When maintaining a 200 odd year old piece of paper is more important than maintaining the lives that the document is meant to server...that is the failing.

[Isaac]

When maintaining a 200 odd year old piece of paper is more important than maintaining the lives that the document is meant to server...that is the failing.

 

Again, there is no connection between the Second Amendment and this shooting. You are grasping at straws to support your ideological position (an ideology which says big government / government should have a monopoly on violence and people should all be disarmed - an ideology you happen to share with the likes of Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tsi Tung).

[rmanx]

 

When maintaining a 200 odd year old piece of paper is more important than maintaining the lives that the document is meant to server...that is the failing.

 

Again, there is no connection between the Second Amendment and this shooting.

 

Other than the fact that the only reason the shooter had access to readily available firearms is because of subversion of the 2nd Amendment.

 

Oh and the whole Hitler, Mao, etc thing...typical response from the RepConNRA nutjobs in America. We live in a society where you can walk down the street and not have to worry about being gunned down. You are 300% more likely to be shot in America than you are in the UK.

[Isaac]

 

 

 

Other than the fact that the only reason the shooter had access to readily available firearms is because of subversion of the 2nd Amendment.

 

 

You have used a non sequitur logical fallacy. It is equivalent to blaming the Wright brothers for 9/11.

 

 

 

Oh and the whole Hitler, Mao, etc thing...typical response from the RepConNRA nutjobs in America. We live in a society where you can walk down the street and not have to worry about being gunned down. You are 300% more likely to be shot in America than you are in the UK.

 

 

You're more likely to be stabbed in the UK than shot in America.

[rmanx]

Not really. If it weren't for the culture of fear that outlets like FOX and groups like the NRA have created, there wouldn't a need for more guns than people in the country.

 

The founding fathers never envisaged people having access to the kind of fire power available today, how could they?

 

When we have mass stabbings on an almost daily basis, on the scale at which America has mass shootings...then we'll take. Also, comparing shootings to stabbings is a bit disingenuous.

 

With the kinds of weapons available to buy in America you could easily kill 20-30 people depending on your skill. A knife requires close proximity, and is a lot easier (comparatively) to defend against/disarm than an AR15 or AK47.

[Isaac]

Not really. If it weren't for the culture of fear that outlets like FOX and groups like the NRA have created, there wouldn't a need for more guns than people in the country.

 

The founding fathers never envisaged people having access to the kind of fire power available today, how could they?

 

When we have mass stabbings on an almost daily basis, on the scale at which America has mass shootings...then we'll take. Also, comparing shootings to stabbings is a bit disingenuous.

 

With the kinds of weapons available to buy in America you could easily kill 20-30 people depending on your skill. A knife requires close proximity, and is a lot easier (comparatively) to defend against/disarm than an AR15 or AK47.

 

The Second Amendment dates back to the 18th century. It is about protecting rights and liberties and safeguarding the nation against tyranny both foreign and domestic. It has nothing to do with fear. Fox News didn't even go on the airwaves until 1996. The Second Amendment is supported by both Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives. You want to try and characterise all gun owners or defenders of the Second Amendment as nutjobs, but Americans from all walks of life, all races, all incomes, all religions, all politician affiliations, all own guns. Even Michael Moore is a member of the NRA. The Second Amendment doesn't give the right to unlimited and all types of weapons. There are already laws and regulations for guns in America. If they're not being properly followed, that isn't the fault of the principle of the Second Amendment. What I would say to you is that SSRI (anti-depressant) drugs have been linked to most if not all of the shootings since Columbine. It's always emerged they were already known to mental health services and on anti-depressants or anti-psychotic drugs which are known to cause people to have suicidal or homicidal tendencies. So stop blaming the Second Amendment and guns and why not look at the bigger picture. Guns are just like any other tool - they are neutral; it's the people who use them and their intention which determines the outcome.

[mojomonkey]

 

 

 

 

Other than the fact that the only reason the shooter had access to readily available firearms is because of subversion of the 2nd Amendment.

 

 

You have used a non sequitur logical fallacy. It is equivalent to blaming the Wright brothers for 9/11.

 

 

 

Oh and the whole Hitler, Mao, etc thing...typical response from the RepConNRA nutjobs in America. We live in a society where you can walk down the street and not have to worry about being gunned down. You are 300% more likely to be shot in America than you are in the UK.

 

 

You're more likely to be stabbed in the UK than shot in America.

 

 

https://dispellingthemythukvsusguns.wordpress.com/

[Isaac]

I'm not even going to waste my time reading someone's blog. I've read the proper statistics from verified peer-reviewed sources and it's clear that there is a higher per head of population risk of being victim of a violent crime in the UK than in the USA, and the presence of guns in the homes of law abiding citizens actually reduces the incidence of violent crime. All of which is beside the point, as the Second Amendment is not dependent on statistics or people being safe - it's there to safeguard the republic and its citizenry from tyranny both foreign and domestic. Government does not have a right to a monopoly on guns. Every free person has a right to own a gun for their self defence and to protect their country and constitution. As Sauin said, the Holocaust is a case in point of the need for law abiding citizens to own guns - and that was only decades ago, and in a first world country, not some distant past or out in some third world cesspool. I don't know how anyone can know about the Holocaust and not instantly believe law abiding citizens should be armed. Why they think the government had a right to a monopoly on guns is beyond me, as it led to millions of law abiding citizens being murdered like lambs to a slaughter.

[spook]

American 'society' and the way that it is constructed means that being armed is rather a good idea, especially as the fall-out from the disastrous obama agenda gets under way.

[Vulgarian]

I'm not even going to waste my time reading someone's blog. I've read the proper statistics from verified peer-reviewed sources and it's clear that there is a higher per head of population risk of being victim of a violent crime in the UK than in the USA, and the presence of guns in the homes of law abiding citizens actually reduces the incidence of violent crime

 

Way to go, TJ, spinning the statistics. Can you show your sources for the above assertion, please? "Violent crime" is very hard to compare between countries because almost almost every country records it in a different way.

 

Homicide rates are much clearer, and they are incontrovertible: the homicide rate is the USA is 3 times higher than the UK (and most other developed countries), and around two thirds of homicides in the USA were carried out with a firearm. Sources 1 2

 

The ease of access to guns in that country is thought to be the main reason for these extremely high murder statistics.