LaxPower Back-Up Stick

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:28 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:10 pm

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:00 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:52 pm

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:51 pm

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:59 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 12:10 pmMD you make some interesting points. I can only say that until the folks on your side find a way to circumvent the 2nd amendment your peeing in the wind. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGE D has no ambiguity.

OMG! Dumbest...err...Cradle...HAS IT FIGURED OUT! Yeah! Just BARE those arms and we'll be one safe, massacre-free nation! Boy, it's good having you here, Cradle...you and Joe really add a TUN to the discussion!!



Question for ya, C&S: you're a bit of an originalist when it comes to the Constitution, right? Did the framers original intent revolve around the type of "arms" (bare or not) that were available in the late 18th century? Did they think that WHATEVER civilization came up with in terms to TYPES of arms would be just AOK going forward...with respect to what they thought about, in the 1780's, as "Constitutional Rights"??

Asking for a friend...

..

You have friends on this site?

Joe

He does!!

Good to know. So in other words, he has a similar narrow-minded political ideology that for some reason you and the regular suspects feel they must defend. You have my respect, I've always made that clear. You also have other interests outside of the political threads. I can't remember the last time Dis contributed regarding lacrosse. If he likes politics so much, there are much more reputable political websites in which he can join and post with other like-minded individuals that share his intense political anger and resentment.

Joe

Diss is a longtime lacrosse official, if my memory serves me (which, sometimes, it doesn't), and is an ardent believer in the Country we all share. He disagrees, I think, that Congress needs to stand idly by while children are murdered on a weekly basis by violent, assault rifle carrying young men. He's hardly "narrow-minded;" on the contrary, he believes that church and state ought to be separate; that politics is a profession that might help people and empower the disenfranchised; that women's bodies are, in the first place, their own and not the regulatory fodder of white men who desperately cling to power through census undercounting and gerrymandering and voter suppression legislation.

Contributing to the lacrosse threads is not a requirement for this little club, any more than it is a prerequisite for posting on the politics threads. He asked a good question, above: did the Framers anticipate that the Second Amendment would mean that everyone is entitled -- as a constitutional matter -- to own and wield the state of the art technology in guncraft? The late Scalia said that the answer to that question is "No."

I don't think anybody in our entire government can be considered "standing idly by" when it comes to this issue. Take off the rose-colored glasses and see the problem for what it really is. It's a humanitarian crisis that is not inherently political in nature. Enjoy the games this weekend.

Joe

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.

a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.

Of course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.

Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.

They're idiots.

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:10 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.

Of course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.

Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.

They're idiots.

I work in a law firm, which once was maybe 75% GOP. My guess is that is down to about 25%, most of the Republicans having changed to Independents because their party left them looking for water in the desert.

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:14 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:10 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.

Of course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.

Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.

They're idiots.

I work in a law firm, which once was maybe 75% GOP. My guess is that is down to about 25%, most of the Republicans having changed to Independents because their party left them looking for water in the desert.

Interesting, I currently live in a area that used to lean heavily democratic and now has shifted towards being more republican in nature. It's a two-way street.

Joe

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:39 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:10 pm

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:00 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:52 pm

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:51 pm

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:59 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 12:10 pmMD you make some interesting points. I can only say that until the folks on your side find a way to circumvent the 2nd amendment your peeing in the wind. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGE D has no ambiguity.

OMG! Dumbest...err...Cradle...HAS IT FIGURED OUT! Yeah! Just BARE those arms and we'll be one safe, massacre-free nation! Boy, it's good having you here, Cradle...you and Joe really add a TUN to the discussion!!



Question for ya, C&S: you're a bit of an originalist when it comes to the Constitution, right? Did the framers original intent revolve around the type of "arms" (bare or not) that were available in the late 18th century? Did they think that WHATEVER civilization came up with in terms to TYPES of arms would be just AOK going forward...with respect to what they thought about, in the 1780's, as "Constitutional Rights"??

Asking for a friend...

..

You have friends on this site?

Joe

He does!!

Good to know. So in other words, he has a similar narrow-minded political ideology that for some reason you and the regular suspects feel they must defend. You have my respect, I've always made that clear. You also have other interests outside of the political threads. I can't remember the last time Dis contributed regarding lacrosse. If he likes politics so much, there are much more reputable political websites in which he can join and post with other like-minded individuals that share his intense political anger and resentment.

Joe

Diss is a longtime lacrosse official, if my memory serves me (which, sometimes, it doesn't), and is an ardent believer in the Country we all share. He disagrees, I think, that Congress needs to stand idly by while children are murdered on a weekly basis by violent, assault rifle carrying young men. He's hardly "narrow-minded;" on the contrary, he believes that church and state ought to be separate; that politics is a profession that might help people and empower the disenfranchised; that women's bodies are, in the first place, their own and not the regulatory fodder of white men who desperately cling to power through census undercounting and gerrymandering and voter suppression legislation.

Contributing to the lacrosse threads is not a requirement for this little club, any more than it is a prerequisite for posting on the politics threads. He asked a good question, above: did the Framers anticipate that the Second Amendment would mean that everyone is entitled -- as a constitutional matter -- to own and wield the state of the art technology in guncraft? The late Scalia said that the answer to that question is "No."

On a tangential issue how come the nightly slaughter in our cities do to illegal weapons is always brushed under the rug? It never garners the national headlines like a mass shooting. If the 2nd amendment needs to be fine tuned there is a remedy for that... Amend the constitution and let the people decide. That seems to be more logical than doing an end run around it.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:49 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:53 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 7:51 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 8:58 pm Anti-depressant drugs, covid isolation, violent video games, social media, breakdown of family structure

... is there a point??

All the things I listed were factors in the Uvaldea &/or Buffalo shootings.

It's not just access to semi-automatic weapons. The TX tower shooter killed 11 & wounded 31 with a bolt action rifle.

Mass shootings have increased with the advent of violent video games & social media.

The ten year ban on semi-automatic weapons did not work. Don't chase simplistic solutions.

... you have no proof of this. You are guessing that they might have had an impact. Some of them I would agree might be a contributing factor. At the end of the day however, it requires the means to carry through on the act, which means guns and body armor. The Austin Tower shooting is not really relevant. Special circumstances. Not just anyone could have carried that mass killing out. Todays mass shootings, anyone can carry them out. None of the items you list are necessary or sufficient, a gun with high fire rate and capacity coupled with any old human is necessary and sufficient.

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:14 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:10 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.

Of course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.

Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.

They're idiots.

I work in a law firm, which once was maybe 75% GOP. My guess is that is down to about 25%, most of the Republicans having changed to Independents because their party left them looking for water in the desert.

Interesting, I currently live in a area that used to lean heavily democratic and now has shifted towards being more republican in nature. It's a two-way street.

Joe

old salt wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:32 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:49 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:53 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 7:51 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 8:58 pm Anti-depressant drugs, covid isolation, violent video games, social media, breakdown of family structure

... is there a point??

All the things I listed were factors in the Uvaldea &/or Buffalo shootings.

It's not just access to semi-automatic weapons. The TX tower shooter killed 11 & wounded 31 with a bolt action rifle.

Mass shootings have increased with the advent of violent video games & social media.

The ten year ban on semi-automatic weapons did not work. Don't chase simplistic solutions.

... you have no proof of this. You are guessing that they might have had an impact. Some of them I would agree might be a contributing factor. At the end of the day however, it requires the means to carry through on the act, which means guns and body armor. The Austin Tower shooting is not really relevant. Special circumstances. Not just anyone could have carried that mass killing out. Todays mass shootings, anyone can carry them out. None of the items you list are necessary or sufficient, a gun with high fire rate and capacity coupled with any old human is necessary and sufficient.

Read the reporting on the 2 latest shooters.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:39 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:10 pm

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:00 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:52 pm

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:51 pm

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:59 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 12:10 pmMD you make some interesting points. I can only say that until the folks on your side find a way to circumvent the 2nd amendment your peeing in the wind. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGE D has no ambiguity.

OMG! Dumbest...err...Cradle...HAS IT FIGURED OUT! Yeah! Just BARE those arms and we'll be one safe, massacre-free nation! Boy, it's good having you here, Cradle...you and Joe really add a TUN to the discussion!!



Question for ya, C&S: you're a bit of an originalist when it comes to the Constitution, right? Did the framers original intent revolve around the type of "arms" (bare or not) that were available in the late 18th century? Did they think that WHATEVER civilization came up with in terms to TYPES of arms would be just AOK going forward...with respect to what they thought about, in the 1780's, as "Constitutional Rights"??

Asking for a friend...

..

You have friends on this site?

Joe

He does!!

Good to know. So in other words, he has a similar narrow-minded political ideology that for some reason you and the regular suspects feel they must defend. You have my respect, I've always made that clear. You also have other interests outside of the political threads. I can't remember the last time Dis contributed regarding lacrosse. If he likes politics so much, there are much more reputable political websites in which he can join and post with other like-minded individuals that share his intense political anger and resentment.

Joe

Diss is a longtime lacrosse official, if my memory serves me (which, sometimes, it doesn't), and is an ardent believer in the Country we all share. He disagrees, I think, that Congress needs to stand idly by while children are murdered on a weekly basis by violent, assault rifle carrying young men. He's hardly "narrow-minded;" on the contrary, he believes that church and state ought to be separate; that politics is a profession that might help people and empower the disenfranchised; that women's bodies are, in the first place, their own and not the regulatory fodder of white men who desperately cling to power through census undercounting and gerrymandering and voter suppression legislation.

Contributing to the lacrosse threads is not a requirement for this little club, any more than it is a prerequisite for posting on the politics threads. He asked a good question, above: did the Framers anticipate that the Second Amendment would mean that everyone is entitled -- as a constitutional matter -- to own and wield the state of the art technology in guncraft? The late Scalia said that the answer to that question is "No."

On a tangential issue how come the nightly slaughter in our cities do to illegal weapons is always brushed under the rug? It never garners the national headlines like a mass shooting. There is no reason to try to distinguish between legal and illegal weapons in this discussion. Many if not most crimes are committed with legal weapons (up until the time they are used in the commission of a crime). The question you are asking is why are we allowing Americans to senselessly kill each other in criminal activities inside our largest cities. The answer is no mystery - it requires a huge, massively expensive, very dangerous effort to get guns off these streets. It is mostly criminal on criminal crime that would result in lots of non-criminals (police officers) being killed in the effort to clean it up. It is really that simple. Far more people would die in cleaning it up, than innocent civilians who are now losing their lives. If you want to volunteer ... At some point we as a nation will get the courage to clean it up.

If the 2nd amendment needs to be fine tuned - It doesn't - there is a remedy for that... Amend the constitution and let the people decide. That seems to be more logical than doing an end run around it.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:37 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:39 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:10 pm

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:00 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:52 pm

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:51 pm

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 1:59 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 12:10 pmMD you make some interesting points. I can only say that until the folks on your side find a way to circumvent the 2nd amendment your peeing in the wind. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGE D has no ambiguity.

OMG! Dumbest...err...Cradle...HAS IT FIGURED OUT! Yeah! Just BARE those arms and we'll be one safe, massacre-free nation! Boy, it's good having you here, Cradle...you and Joe really add a TUN to the discussion!!



Question for ya, C&S: you're a bit of an originalist when it comes to the Constitution, right? Did the framers original intent revolve around the type of "arms" (bare or not) that were available in the late 18th century? Did they think that WHATEVER civilization came up with in terms to TYPES of arms would be just AOK going forward...with respect to what they thought about, in the 1780's, as "Constitutional Rights"??

Asking for a friend...

..

You have friends on this site?

Joe

He does!!

Good to know. So in other words, he has a similar narrow-minded political ideology that for some reason you and the regular suspects feel they must defend. You have my respect, I've always made that clear. You also have other interests outside of the political threads. I can't remember the last time Dis contributed regarding lacrosse. If he likes politics so much, there are much more reputable political websites in which he can join and post with other like-minded individuals that share his intense political anger and resentment.

Joe

Diss is a longtime lacrosse official, if my memory serves me (which, sometimes, it doesn't), and is an ardent believer in the Country we all share. He disagrees, I think, that Congress needs to stand idly by while children are murdered on a weekly basis by violent, assault rifle carrying young men. He's hardly "narrow-minded;" on the contrary, he believes that church and state ought to be separate; that politics is a profession that might help people and empower the disenfranchised; that women's bodies are, in the first place, their own and not the regulatory fodder of white men who desperately cling to power through census undercounting and gerrymandering and voter suppression legislation.

Contributing to the lacrosse threads is not a requirement for this little club, any more than it is a prerequisite for posting on the politics threads. He asked a good question, above: did the Framers anticipate that the Second Amendment would mean that everyone is entitled -- as a constitutional matter -- to own and wield the state of the art technology in guncraft? The late Scalia said that the answer to that question is "No."

On a tangential issue how come the nightly slaughter in our cities do to illegal weapons is always brushed under the rug? It never garners the national headlines like a mass shooting. There is no reason to try to distinguish between legal and illegal weapons in this discussion. Many if not most crimes are committed with legal weapons (up until the time they are used in the commission of a crime). The question you are asking is why are we allowing Americans to senselessly kill each other in criminal activities inside our largest cities. The answer is no mystery - it requires a huge, massively expensive, very dangerous effort to get guns off these streets. It is mostly criminal on criminal crime that would result in lots of non-criminals (police officers) being killed in the effort to clean it up. It is really that simple. Far more people would die in cleaning it up, than innocent civilians who are now losing their lives. If you want to volunteer ... At some point we as a nation will get the courage to clean it up.

If the 2nd amendment needs to be fine tuned - It doesn't - there is a remedy for that... Amend the constitution and let the people decide. That seems to be more logical than doing an end run around it.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 6:03 pm ... public school teacher - the worst and most underpaid job in America!

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:33 pm

JoeMauer89 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:14 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:10 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 4:06 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:15 pm Percent of national Democrats? About 33% today, 1 in 3. I suspect it’s actually more than half.

Of course you do. You're a zealot. You think that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be a far left nutjob.

Partisans think that there's no such thing as an American centrist. They think there's only far right and far left.

They're idiots.

I work in a law firm, which once was maybe 75% GOP. My guess is that is down to about 25%, most of the Republicans having changed to Independents because their party left them looking for water in the desert.

Interesting, I currently live in a area that used to lean heavily democratic and now has shifted towards being more republican in nature. It's a two-way street.

Joe

You do know what type of people the current republican party also appeals to don’t you?