The problem would be if the constitution prevented banning such things becausese, for example, we had the right to stone adulterers to death.

It's interesting that so much of the rhetoric around gun ownership centers on self-defense and the importance of guns as a bulwark against tyranny. The latter point was highly relevant in the late 18th century, but much less relevant now.

The reality is the most NRA members own guns not because they believe it is a necessity but rather because they enjoy it. And most people like nucularburro place minimal value on the value of enjoying guns, especially when measuring that enjoyment against the loss of life caused by gun violence.

I think you should be able to vote even if you are incarcerated.

[carlin meme] A document created by slave owners who wanted to be free.[/carlin meme]

Couple of things:

1. The cops that couldn't go stop the shooter should be either fired, or jailed for a decent amount of time.
2. Gun ownership per household has been trending down for quite some time per this study which I thought was interesting.




3. I'd like to see a vouch program, where you need to get a current gun owner to vouch for you. If either of you commit a crime, then you both do the time. I think that could prevent some of what we are seeing today.

I can't imagine the anguish and grief and anger of parents, who are held outside the school by police with tasers drawn, and just outside that frame it is reported that there were about 7 fully outfitted tactical officers with assault rifles also doing crowd control, for the reported 40 minutes to near 90 minutes that the gunman was barricaded inside with locked down kids and going about his killing spree.

It seems that the police, sadly, were treating this like a situation where it is only bad guys barricaded in, so they can wait and form an ideal plan to get them out that poses little or no risk to the officers as opposed the active shooting, it was.

I would add that many US gun owners, the types of which who like to pose with their guns, are also both terrified and glory seeking.

I know American's who live is really safe areas who brag they sleep with the various weapons under their bed. They are both afraid but also have some fantasy of invaders breaching their home, and them delivering to that criminal their due and thus being the hero that defended their family. I think it is a legit fetish for many of them.

But the reality is that they will end up killing their family members far more or giving their family members the tools to kill each other or themselves far more.

And there seems to be no way to educate them that their fear of 'others', should be much smaller, in almost all neighbourhoods, then their fear of interfamily harm, they are bringing in to their homes.

I'm going to amend what I just said. You are correct that the bolded is a significant motivating factor for a decent percentage of people.

I worked with an expert witness several years ago who had fantasies that bordered on the fetishistic about being thrust into a situation where he could invoke Florida's stand your ground law. Quite predictably, he lived in a gated community where the actual risk of a home invasion was vanishingly small.

couple things.

first the constitution isn't some magical amazing document like the USA#1 conservatives want you to believe, and the founding fathers weren't all super geniuses.

second, the US system of federalism may have been a good idea up until the invention of the automobile, but now makes basically zero sense with the level of travel and interstate commerce. republicans can't wait to talk about chicago and the "faiilings: of their strict gun laws, but 60% of firearms in chicago come from outside illinois.

thirdly, the red dawn level fan fiction of standing up to a tyrannical government, is hilarious when the government of the United States would simply drone all of us as soon as we stepped off our porches.

fourth, like QP said the fantasy of stopping the mythical home invader to protect the family is also ridiculous. your family is FAR more likely to be killed by the gun you just brought into the house than anything else. so, congrats?

In my opinion, the freedom of states to set their own regulations and laws is one of the great strengths of the USA. (Not talking specifically about gun regulations; just in general.)

I also had to look up the word "lapidate."

Not problematic with respect to the Constitution (which was the context of chezlaw's post that I was responding to):


Burning heretics at the stake would seem to run afoul of the first amendment. Plus heresy is hard to define; one person's heresy is another person's dogma.

Adultery and Homosexuality are much more easily definable, and thereby easier to construct legislation about (either for or against).

#metoo.

Had this interaction with a chap on reddit, who said:
Honestly, wasn't sure how to respond to that, so left him alone to live in a world where having a AR15 in your shower was the only thing preventing an imminent full-on North Korean invasion!

(photo not his, but from another crazy I found)

it's specifically one of the biggest factors leading towards the potential fall of the united states. but sure. it makes sense that i can travel through 8 different versions of healthcare, gun control, marriage and sexual orientation equality, and public accommodation regulations in a single day because it feels good to say "f the libtards".

So a slight spin on what Sighted mentioned up thread of the 'Red Dawn' type cosplay fantasy of the US being invaded by China (other), the gov't failing, and the well armed citizens being the force that rise up to defend the Nation and take it back.

The heart of so many Alien Invasion movies that focus on a 'Boo ya Murica' type story (Independence Day) where normal citizens rise up to defeat the invaders.

I wonder seriously if decade upon decade of such Movie representations has conditioned many in the US to believe it is both necessary and doable??

For several decades, those movies have been aimed at least as much at international audiences as domestic audiences.

Got it. I thought you meant not problematic from a policy standpoint.

But you would still have a massive Eighth Amendment problem imo. Proportionality is a factor in Eighth Amendment jurisprudence.

I'm not saying the police shouldn't have gone in quicker but this aint Dirty Harry, they aint well trained and they might just have easily raised the death toll considerably.

That's what the 'wise men' are for

Well this is pretty much the worst life experience I can imagine.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/us/uv...day/index.html

Even I (of all people) would find stoning folks problematic from a policy standpoint.

+1

Well that's a relief.

They're constrained by fear of legal liability and orders given to them on that basis.