Jeh Johnson: Gun control is now a matter of homeland security

[Citizen.Seven]

So you think these nuts are not targeting GFZ. Most predators in the wild target the weak, the young, the old, the sick, etc. These are just the facts of life. They apply to all animals including us. The solution is not to create more prey for these attackers but to let those that are able to fight back do so as well as protect those that are not able. That is your solution to the problem.

If they're not targeting GFZs, it's extraordinary the regularity in which they get used as a hunting ground. The odds are astronomical if it's just chance that movie theaters, campuses, and now bars where CC is banned are so consistently chosen as targets.

 

[jet57]

So you think these nuts are not targeting GFZ. Most predators in the wild target the weak, the young, the old, the sick, etc. These are just the facts of life. They apply to all animals including us. The solution is not to create more prey for these attackers but to let those that are able to fight back do so as well as protect those that are not able. That is your solution to the problem.

Nope. The Boston bomber targeted a place with armed police all over the place. There was an armed cop on duty in Orlando too.

That argument you're raising is specious at best. In war zones, suicide bombers are walking into armed areas as well.

So these phony pro gun propaganda talking points aren't going to work against what is really happening and why. It's the why that WE really need to go after until we an put an end to it.

The NRA is going to get with the program or they are going to be run over and dismantled by the people in this country.

 

[haymarket]

If you're going to take away rights, it should at least be vetted by a judge. Otherwise, you're giving too much power to policing agencies.

So are you radically increasing the budget so the protections and processes you advocate for can be implemented?

 

[haymarket]

It protects all rights not protected elsewhere. Common Law rights fall under the grouping "all".



We know better. That's not going to fool anyone.



You do realize that this won't justify unreasonable limitations?



Yes we are.



Common Law rights are incorporated into the Constitution. Legislation is not allowed to violate the Constitution.

Aside from that, Common Law applies in any matter where legislation has not been passed.

We are not under Common law of England. The Declaration of Independence took care of that so drop the schtick as its been exposed already.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

So are you radically increasing the budget so the protections and processes you advocate for can be implemented?

No, since I'm not advocating someone on a "watch list" lose any rights.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

Nope. The Boston bomber targeted a place with armed police all over the place. There was an armed cop on duty in Orlando too.

That argument you're raising is specious at best. In war zones, suicide bombers are walking into armed areas as well.

So these phony pro gun propaganda talking points aren't going to work against what is really happening and why. It's the why that WE really need to go after until we an put an end to it.

The NRA is going to get with the program or they are going to be run over and dismantled by the people in this country.

They are with the program, though not as much as they should be: they are protecting 2A rights. Now only if they will start calling out the obvious GFZ connection to these mass killings, perhaps some real progress could be made.

 

[haymarket]

No, since I'm not advocating someone on a "watch list" lose any rights.

So your previous suggestion was not a serious one and only a flippant remark .

 

[Toggle Almendro]

We are not under Common law of England. The Declaration of Independence took care of that so drop the schtick as its been exposed already.

Our courts kept right on using the same system of Common Law. And our Constitution incorporated all Common Law rights.

 

[haymarket]

Our courts kept right on using the same system of Common Law. And our Constitution incorporated all Common Law rights.

The only rights we have that count are the ones in the Constitution. We are NOT under British law and the Declaration of Independence took car of that.

What is it you are taking issue with anyways? I accept the Second Amendment as written and the rights it provides for Americans.

What is your dispute?

 

[Toggle Almendro]

The only rights we have that count are the ones in the Constitution.

That would include all Common Law rights, including the right to keep a gun at home for self defense, and the right to carry a gun for self defense when going about in public.

What is it you are taking issue with anyways?
What is your dispute?

Earlier you were suggesting that the American people did not have a Constitutional right to have guns for self defense.

That was very clearly wrong.

 

[haymarket]

That would include all Common Law rights...

Where in the Constitution does it say this?

Earlier you were suggesting that the American people did not have a Constitutional right to have guns for self defense.

That was very clearly wrong.

NO - I never made such a statement. Please cite it for me.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

Where in the Constitution does it say this?

In the Ninth Amendment. Once again, Common Law rights fall under the grouping "all rights".

NO - I never made such a statement. Please cite it for me.

I guess I was thinking of your comment about natural rights in #22.

But you did ask for proof in message #110 when I stated that it was a fact that the Constitution protected the civilian right to have guns for self defense.

If we agree that civilians have a Constitutional right to have guns for self defense, perhaps we are in agreement.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Nope. The Boston bomber targeted a place with armed police all over the place. There was an armed cop on duty in Orlando too.

That argument you're raising is specious at best. In war zones, suicide bombers are walking into armed areas as well.

So these phony pro gun propaganda talking points aren't going to work against what is really happening and why. It's the why that WE really need to go after until we an put an end to it.

The NRA is going to get with the program or they are going to be run over and dismantled by the people in this country.

Well the NRA conventions are a gathering of all the so called gun nuts. Let's see how long it takes for one of these terrorist or a gun nut to shoot up one of their conventions. Not likely when everyone in the room is packing. A suicide bombers are a completely different animal. You have to get lucky and hope he gives himself away before he acts. The Shooter is vulnerable from the second he shoots his first victim. How many he kills depends on how long it takes someone to stop him. If the general public is armed he will be stopped pretty quick. If the general public is unarmed then you get these high kill numbers such as 49. There was no way the Orlando shooter could kill 49 armed citizens that are proficient with their gun or well regulated. That is fact you cannot deny. Disarming the American people will only increase the number of people these nuts will kill. That is a fact as well.

 

[jet57]

They are with the program, though not as much as they should be: they are protecting 2A rights. Now only if they will start calling out the obvious GFZ connection to these mass killings, perhaps some real progress could be made.

They are going to get with the program or be swept away. Republicans are nothing but a mess and major elections are coming up. Gun Free Zones are a political talking point and have zero to do with it.

 

[jet57]

Well the NRA conventions are a gathering of all the so called gun nuts. Let's see how long it takes for one of these terrorist or a gun nut to shoot up one of their conventions. Not likely when everyone in the room is packing. A suicide bombers are a completely different animal. You have to get lucky and hope he gives himself away before he acts. The Shooter is vulnerable from the second he shoots his first victim. How many he kills depends on how long it takes someone to stop him. If the general public is armed he will be stopped pretty quick. If the general public is unarmed then you get these high kill numbers such as 49. There was no way the Orlando shooter could kill 49 armed citizens that are proficient with their gun or well regulated. That is fact you cannot deny. Disarming the American people will only increase the number of people these nuts will kill. That is a fact as well.

yeah, sure

None of what you're saying has anything to do with anything.

 

[haymarket]

In the Ninth Amendment. Once again, Common Law rights fall under the grouping "all rights".

The Constitution DOES NOT say that.

 

[haymarket]

But you did ask for proof in message #110 when I stated that it was a fact that the Constitution protected the civilian right to have guns for self defense.

Actually I was asking for evidence on ALL the things you said in that post. I never took issue with the idea that the Constitution says people have a right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

The Constitution DOES NOT say that.

It does. The Ninth Amendment incorporates all rights not covered elsewhere in the Constitution.

Common Law rights fall under the category "all rights".

Actually I was asking for evidence on ALL the things you said in that post. I never took issue with the idea that the Constitution says people have a right to keep and bear arms.

As far as I can tell, everything else in my post was self evident.

My observations on the behavior of gun banners were my own observations.

Leviathan is pretty famous as the founding of our modern legal philosophy.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

They are going to get with the program or be swept away. Republicans are nothing but a mess and major elections are coming up. Gun Free Zones are a political talking point and have zero to do with it.

Except every major spree killing has occurred in one. Other than that...

 

[TurtleDude]

Except every major spree killing has occurred in one. Other than that...

Jet continues to argue that if we gun owners don't bend over and accept more gun control we will lose all our rights That's a cowardly and silly approach.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

Jet continues to argue that if we gun owners don't bend over and accept more gun control we will lose all our rights That's a cowardly and silly approach.

It is amazing the convolutions the left goes through to denigrate and try to nullify 2A rights.

 

[TurtleDude]

It is amazing the convolutions the left goes through to denigrate and try to nullify 2A rights.

its so pathetic and they lie with a straight face.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

yeah, sure

None of what you're saying has anything to do with anything.

100 armed citizens will quickly stop a nut with a run. 100 unarmed and you end up with 49 dead or more depending on how long it takes for someone else with a gun shows up and finally ends the turkey shoot. The truth is the truth and when it doesn't fit your agenda you try and side step the truth.

 

[haymarket]

It does. The Ninth Amendment incorporates all rights not covered elsewhere in the Constitution.

Common Law rights fall under the category "all rights"

The Constitution does not say that. And you have provided no quote from it which does.

As far as I can tell, everything else in my post was self evident.

Ah yes - the standard fall back line from the believer. Sorry - but nothing challenged in debate is "self evident" especially claims made about the existence of rights and the exercise of them.

 

[jonny5]

Concerning your reference - I suggest that NEXT time you actually READ what I post. What I SAID (in post #33) was: While there certainly is in any society "a certain segment...which doesn't care about consequences", why, then, is America's homicide rate (and violent crime rate, and frequency of mass shootings) FAR higher than that of any other first-world nation? If it's no different here as anywhere else as you say, then the rates SHOULD be statistically similar...

...but they're anything but similar.

On the list in your reference, America's in 14th place...but NONE of the top 13 are first-world nations, to wit:

1 Brazil 40,974 2010
2 India 40,752 2009
3 Mexico 25,757 2010
4 Ethiopia 20,239 2008
5 Indonesia 18,963 2008
6 Nigeria 18,422 2008
7 South Africa 15,940 2010
8 Colombia 15,459 2010
9 Russia 14,574 2010
10 Pakistan 13,860 2011
11 Democratic Republic of the Congo 13,558 2008
12 China 13,410 2010
13 Venezuela 13,080 2010

Read the list above - none of those are first-world nations. In fact, after America, the very next first-world nation on the list is South Korea...in FIFTY-SECOND PLACE.

What I said stands - America has by far the highest homicide rate of all first-world nations on the planet. That, sir, is not a matter of debate.

Sorry, China, Indonesia, Russia, Brazil, India, Mexico are third world countries? Every one of those is in the g20 group.