In the race for who is the biggest piece of sh*t, Abbott is really coming down the backstretch and has a lot of momentum. But the GOP POS Field is full of contenders.CU88 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 7:41 pm Texas Gov. Abbott says the Uvalde school shooter had a "mental health challenge" and the state needed to "do a better job with mental health" — yet in April he slashed $211M from the department that oversees mental health programs.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ab ... -rcna30557
... during his first news conference he said the kid had no known mental health issue. Now someone got to him and reminded him of the party line.CU88 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 7:41 pm Texas Gov. Abbott says the Uvalde school shooter had a "mental health challenge" and the state needed to "do a better job with mental health" — yet in April he slashed $211M from the department that oversees mental health programs.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ab ... -rcna30557
... the fact that they aren't banned in congress just points out what pussies the democrats are. They could have done 2 years ago, perhaps 4.CU88 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 7:48 pm Thinking that if guns are not allowed at a NRA convention why not ban them everywhere?
Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1
The House Sergeant-At-Arms has sent a letter to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer saying it's his position that only law enforcement should be able to carry firearms in the U.S. Capitol complex.
5:00 PM · May 26, 2022·TweetDeck
Never been a huge fan of Beto, don't dislike him, he just doesn't resonate with me, he does come off as a bit of a grand stander. However, if ever a grand stand was totally called for, that press conference was it!!! He got the hoped for reaction. Abbott and his pompous toads squealed like stuck pigs.
I mentioned this to someone yesterday
... but the democrats are going to get massacred in the fall. Just ask KellyAnne, she knows.ggait wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 7:06 pm https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/part ... ation.aspx
28% D; 28% GOP; 40% Indy.
Lean GOP 45%; lean D 44%.
Nope, I did.cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:30 pmWhen or where did I say the 2nd was under threat from anyone or anything? I'm saying to ban handguns and semi automatic weapons you first have to address the right to keep and bear arms. No one on this forum yet had explained how to address this little conundrum.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:38 pmWho on this board, other than you and maybe Peter (fine company to be in, eh) keeps repeating that the 2nd Amendment should be eliminated? Who you like this weekend?cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:32 pmWe have a 2nd amendment given to this nation by our founding fathers. I'm certain that came about for a good reason. Who knows, maybe they were bored that day and came up with it as filler until they figured out the 3rd amendment?? Maybe the 2nd was nothing more than a belated April Fools prank?Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:26 pm https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/26/world/us ... index.html
CNN is just spinning
This fact has been noted multiple times over the years of this forum. Never seems to register. The red states sure are willing to go out of their way, cut off their own nose, to own the libs.DocBarrister wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 11:30 pm And the highest per capita gun death rates are in Republican states.
The indisputable fact is that where there are more guns, there are more gun deaths.
This is true despite Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's attempt to explain away gun deaths at the elementary school in his state this week by comparing them to gun violence in Chicago.
"I hate to say this, but there are more people who were shot every weekend in Chicago than there are in schools in Texas," Abbott said on Wednesday, arguing stricter gun laws are not a solution.
There are indeed a horrific number of gun deaths in Chicago each year. CNN has covered the problem.
…But there are more gun deaths in Texas, by far, than in any other state, according to data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Texas suffered 4,164 gun deaths in 2020, the most recent year for which the CDC has published data.
… That's a rate of 14.2 deaths per 100,000 Texans.
California, by comparison, saw 3,449 deaths, a gun death rate of 8.5.
Texas does not have the highest gun death rate, however. Far from it.
The top states by gun death rates are:
Mississippi -- 28.6.
Louisiana -- 26.3.
Wyoming -- 25.9.
Missouri -- 23.9.
Alabama -- 23.6.
Alaska -- 23.5.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics ... index.html
Republicans have blood on their hands … and, yeah, they’re going to burn in hell.
Sorry to break the bad news ….
DocBarrister
I read your input and agree you have some good points. Nowhere does the 2nd, no matter how you interpret well regulated, limits gun owners to only certain type of weapons. So your turning well regulated into something out government does very well.. over regulating. I'm not a fan of AR 15 type weapons. I understand why so many people prefer them as their home defence weapon of choice. The problem is since there are untold millions of these weapons already in American homes trying to regulate them now is more than problematic it is impossible. I agree with you that these weapo ns should be more regulated. The sticking point is what weapons the average citizen determine wants to keep and bear. I don't think they want or need the government making that choice for them. I own 2 rifles. My M1 carbine is sentimental to me. It is the same type of rifle my dad carried through France, Belgium and Germany. On rare occasions I take it out plinking. My other weapon for home defense would get the MD lax seal of approval, a single barrel 410 shotgun. It is my last line of defense if someone ever breaks into my home. I hope everyday that I never need it. I understand your position and I respect it. I wish the founding fathers had not left so much ambiguity built into the 2nd. Trying to define a list of semi automatic weapons has proven almost impossible. You need look no further than the SAFE ACT that king Andy rammed through in NYS. They became totally befuddled about how a certain rifle looks instead of understanding the dynamics and lethality of all of these 5.56 weapons. You want to ban them all and confiscate them from law abiding citizens good luck with that. I'm sure you understand just how impossible your solution is in realville USA. These people have been afraid for years that the government is coming for their guns you just verified all of their concerns by saying yeah.. the government SHOULD be coming for your guns.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 11:13 pmNope, I did.cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:30 pmWhen or where did I say the 2nd was under threat from anyone or anything? I'm saying to ban handguns and semi automatic weapons you first have to address the right to keep and bear arms. No one on this forum yet had explained how to address this little conundrum.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:38 pmWho on this board, other than you and maybe Peter (fine company to be in, eh) keeps repeating that the 2nd Amendment should be eliminated? Who you like this weekend?cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:32 pmWe have a 2nd amendment given to this nation by our founding fathers. I'm certain that came about for a good reason. Who knows, maybe they were bored that day and came up with it as filler until they figured out the 3rd amendment?? Maybe the 2nd was nothing more than a belated April Fools prank?Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 2:26 pm https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/26/world/us ... index.html
CNN is just spinning
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The purpose of this "right of the people to keep and bear arms" is clearly stated; "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of the State"...the State, BTW, refers to the national union, not any specific or several states....it's important to the security of the country to have a well regulated Militia...in the era of the founding, there was no standing army, so being able to call up people to service was important, and to have them well "regulated" meant that they were well equipped and trained and organizable. Now, since then, we've addressed this need with our Reserves system, which enables actual well armed, equipped, trained "militia" to be ready for such action.
thus, far less need for the general citizenry...that said, we've decided as a country to recognize people's rights to have guns...to some extent...and we've also litigated and decided (SCOTUS) that this 'right" may be limited in the interests of public good. For instance, machine guns are not allowed for general citizen use and ownership. As well as all sorts of restrictions on how and where guns may be used. That alone, is sufficient precedent for any number of restrictions contemplated today.
So, to me, this 2nd amendment argument really has no actual bearing. The serious questions are simply what restrictions have made sense.
I've proposed that only certain kinds of weapons should be kept in homes, they should only be kept there by those licensed and trained to have such weapons, storage requirements, etc. Hunting being one such permitted, licensed usage. Other sorts of weapons such as handguns and semi and fully automatic weapons should not be in the home, rather they can be kept in regulated, licensed gun ranges and storage, useful for sport in such settings, and come the apocalypse, retrievable as necessary.
You do know the Buffalo shooter bought his weapon in NYS which is regulated by king Andy's SAFE ACT??? That is what happens when stupid people cherry pick what they think are "safer" types of 5.56 weapons. Not that it matters because the millions of 5.56 rifles already legally owned were grandfathered into the SAFE ACT. The owner simply needs to register them with the state every 5 years.CU88 wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 6:30 am We know that the GOP doesn't like science but
The Science Is Clear: Gun Control Saves Lives
By enacting simple laws that make guns safer and harder to get, we can prevent killings like the ones in Uvalde and Buffalo
By The Editors on May 26, 2022
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... ves-lives/
Some editorials simply hurt to write. This is one.
At least 19 elementary school children and two teachers are dead, many more are injured, and a grandmother is fighting for her life in Uvalde, Tex., all because a young man, armed with an AR-15-style rifle, decided to fire in a school.
By now, you know these facts: This killing spree was the largest school shooting since Sandy Hook. Law enforcement couldn’t immediately subdue the killer. In Texas, it’s alarmingly easy to buy and openly carry a gun. In the immediate hours after the shooting, President Biden demanded reform, again. Legislators demanded reform, again. And progun politicians turned to weathered talking points: arm teachers and build safer schools.
But rather than arm our teachers (who have enough to do without keeping that gun away from students and having to train like law enforcement to confront an armed attacker), rather than spend much-needed school dollars on more metal detectors instead of education, we need to make it harder to buy a gun. Especially the kind of weapons used by this killer and the white supremacist who killed 10 people grocery shopping in Buffalo. And we need to put a lasting stop to the political obstruction of taxpayer-funded research into gun-related injuries and deaths.
The science is abundantly clear: More guns do not stop crime. Guns kill more children each year than auto accidents. More children die by gunfire in a year than on-duty police officers and active military members. Guns are a public health crisis, just like COVID, and in this, we are failing our children, over and over again.
In the U.S., we have existing infrastructure that we could easily emulate to make gun use safer: the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Created by Congress in 1970, this federal agency is tasked, among other things, with helping us drive a car safely. It gathers data on automobile deaths. It’s the agency that monitors and studies seat belt usage. While we track firearm-related deaths, no such safety-driven agency exists for gun use.
During the early 1990s, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began to explore gun violence as a public health issue. After studies tied having a firearm to increased homicide risk, the National Rifle Association took action, spearheading the infamous Dickey Amendment, diverting gun research dollars and preventing federal funding from being used to promote gun control. For more than 20 years, research on gun violence in this country has been hard to do.
What research we have is clear and grim. For example, in 2017, guns overtook 60 years of cars as the biggest injury-based killer of children and young adults (ages one to 24) in the U.S. By 2020, about eight in every 100,000 people died of car crashes. About 10 in every 100,000 people died of gun injuries.
While cars have become increasingly safer (it’s one of the auto industry’s main talking points in marketing these days), the gun lobby has thwarted nearly all attempts to make it harder to fire a weapon. With federal protection against some lawsuits, the financial incentive of a giant tort payout to make guns safer is virtually nonexistent.
After the Uvalde killings, the attorney general of Texas, Ken Paxton, said he’d “rather have law-abiding citizens armed and trained so that they can respond when something like this happens.” Sen. Ted Cruz emphasized “armed law enforcement on the campus.” They are two of many conservatives who see more guns as the key to fighting gun crime. They are wrong.
A study comparing gun deaths the U.S. to other high-income countries in Europe and Asia tells us that our homicide rate in teens and young adults is 49 times higher. Our firearm suicide rate is eight times higher. The U.S. has more guns than any of the countries in the comparison.
As we previously reported, in 2015, assaults with a firearm were 6.8 times more common in states that had the most guns, compared to the least. More than a dozen studies have revealed that if you had a gun at home, you were twice as likely to be killed as someone who didn’t. Research from the Harvard School of Public Health tells us that states with higher gun ownership levels have higher rates of homicide. Data even tells us that where gun shops or gun dealers open for business, killings go up. These are but a few of the studies that show the exact opposite of what progun politicians are saying. The science must not be ignored.
Science points to laws that would work to reduce shootings, to lower death. Among the simplest would be better permitting laws with fewer loopholes. When Missouri repealed its permit law, gun-related killings increased by 25 percent. Another would be to ban people who are convicted of violent crime from buying a gun. In California, before the state passed such a law, people convicted of crimes were almost 30 percent more likely to be arrested again for a gun or violent crime than those who, after the law, couldn’t buy a gun.
Such laws, plus red flag laws and those taking guns out of the hands of domestic abusers and people who abuse alcohol, would lower our gun violence rate as a nation. But it would require elected officials to detach themselves from the gun lobby. There are so many issues to consider when voting, but in this midterm election year, we believe that protection from gun violence is one that voters could really advance. Surveys routinely show that gun control measures are extremely popular with the U.S. population.
In the meantime, there is some hope. Congress restored funding for gun-related research in 2019, and there are researchers now looking at ways to reduce gun deaths. But it’s unclear if this change in funding is permanent. And what we’ve lost is 20 years of data on gun injuries, death, safety measures and a score of other things that could make gun ownership in this country safer.
Against all this are families whose lives will never be the same because of gun violence. Who must mourn children and adults lost in domestic violence, accidental killings and mass shootings that are so common, we are still grieving one when the next one occurs.
We need to become the kind of country that looks at guns for what they are: weapons that kill. And treat them with the kind of respect that insists they be harder to get and safer to use.
And then we need to become the kind of country that says the lives of children are more valuable than the right to weapons that have killed them, time and again. Since Columbine. Since Sandy Hook. Since always.