Thank you, for sharing that; a fascinating read.
Seriously; I’m not snarking.
What’s the point again?
Straight outta Bill O’Reilly: These massacres are the “price of freedom” here:
His name is one that I recognize if it is mentioned; but if you asked me what his name is, I would not remember it.
So is it an actual left argument, or just an argument that pro-gun folks think liberals should be making but aren’t, for some unaccountable reason?
If the victims of these shootings are “paying the price for our freedom”, then they should be treated like any soldier killed during wartime. I also like the term “Second Amendment Martyrs”.
It’s almost a comical name, like something out of Douglas Adams.
tbf, he calls it “American freedom”.
Which is appropriate because 310 million guns in the hands of the general public is no kind of freedom I’d understand.
Absolutely. Let’s bury them in military cemeteries (including Arlington National Cemetery) if their survivors wish it, and give their surviving relatives the same benefits that the survivors of soldiers killed in the line of duty receive.
And same for those who are wounded: they should get the same care that soldiers who are wounded in action get, including lifetime VA benefits.
Seriously, this is something the Dems ought to propose. As a wiser man than I once said, “let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan.”
The massacres aren’t the price of ‘freedom’, because, well, you guys ain’t free, at least not freer than any other first-world country. I would argue less free in many respects, except with regards to guns and porn (be proud USA!).
The massacres are the price of having lax gun laws, which I said on this board maybe about 10 years ago. I’m not saying it’s good or bad, but that’s the reality. It seems USA is OK with the massacres. That’s fine, but it’s not the price of freedom.
With 24 hour military honor guard, to be provided by, oh, let’s say a well-regulated militia.
Maybe that’s quite true, but I always ask, what difference will it make, seriously?
Colt bought the patents for the AR-15 back in 1960, the rifle was prototyped by Armalite all the way back in 1958! There are millions and millions of semi-automatic rifles in circulation in the USA. And they’re all capable of being used to do a mass shooting spree. An example: the Colt AR-15 SP1 Carbine used to commit the Port Arthur massacre was manufactured in 1976. So long as they’re looked after, SAR’s really are long lasting devices.
And so, that’s the point really… repealing 2A is largely moot in circumstances where millions of SAR’s are already out there in the field. We’re talking turning the USA into one hell of a police state to get rid of them all, I reckon.
I’m not sure I agree. I actually don’t know the guy’s name. I’m sure it’s appeared in some of what I’ve read, but I’ve not remembered it.
Granted, I don’t remember the victim’s names, either. But I think we can get half of that.
So if we can’t do everything, there’s no point in doing anything; is that it?
There’s the can-do spirit that made America great. :rolleyes:
There really are things where half-measures are worse than useless.
By all means, please enlighten us as to which half-measures that would possibly only slightly lower gun deaths would be worse than doing nothing.
I’m tired; I decline to joust. Maybe later.
Yeah, thought so.
The half measure which stopped his mother in law from getting shot?
Heck, most guns of any kind are long-lasting if they’re not abused and ill-cared for, or cheap crap to begin with. They just don’t wear out the way, say, vehicles do. I’ve got a target pistol manufactured in 1938 and it still shoots as well as the day it came on the market. So, yeh, I’m all for stricter controls, competency testing for licensing, mandatory registration and insurance, etc., but realistically this country is awash in lethal implements.