Another school shooting

[tinselwolverine]

I will repeat what I posted in 232 - there is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.

The more than reasonable AR 15 restrictions that this president wants are encroachments on the 2nd Amendment.

In his majority decision on Heller (ten fucking years ago, for the love of God) Justice Scalia wrote that an individual's right to bear arms in no way precluded the government's prerogative to impose reasonable restrictions, nevertheless.

Scalia was right on that tenet, or he wasn't.

There is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.

I love to quote myself.

Now, I'll quote Justice Scalia, from the DC v Heller Decision:

There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms. Of course the right was not unlimited, just as the First Amendment ’s right of free speech was not, see, e.g., United States v. Williams, 553 U. S. ___ (2008). Thus, we do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens to carry arms for any sort of confrontation, just as we do not read the First Amendment to protect the right of citizens to speak for any purpose....

Thus, we do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens to carry arms for any sort of confrontation...

Like, for example, the right for a psychotic teenage citizen to confront a school full of unarmed children...

We all agree more than we disagree.

I don't think anybody here is hostile to the 2nd Amendment.

I don't think anybody here disagrees with Justice Scalia's majority decision that of course, the right was not unlimited.

So maybe we could all just focus on and think about addressing the problem at hand, the mass slaughterings at schools by psychotic teenagers, and put aside partisan differences and suspicions of someone else's possible agendas to have an adult and productive discussion.

 

[Gulo Blue]

So maybe we could all just focus on and think about addressing the problem at hand, the mass slaughterings at schools by psychotic teenagers, and put aside partisan differences and suspicions of someone else's possible agendas to have adult and productive discussion.

Sure. I'm not worried about any slippery slope here.

 

[Michchamp]

Scalia was a dumbass and an embarassment to Italian Americans.

 

[Spartanmack]

the right to bear arms... as a member of a well-organized militia.

The pyschopaths who shoot up schools or public gatherings are never members of well-organized militias.

why is it so difficult for you to grasp what's going on?

nobody is arguing for psychos rights to own guns. I've said repeatedly that there should be mental health screening as part of background checks for buying guns. I've also said I'm all for banning bump stocks. Most people agree with those. I'm not willing to ban AR-15s or semi-automatics outright. I don't think semiautomatics are the problem nor is banning them the solution. You seem to be conveniently ignoring my position so you can brow beat me with your false sense of moral superiority. I don't care about gun profits and I'm not for unfettered 2nd amendment rights so stop lying about it and arguing against a position I'm not taking.

Also, didn't Adams say the people are the militia? I think even he would make an exception for the crazy ones in today's world.

 

[Michchamp]

...

The Sandy Hook incident was still high in the public discussion at that time, and you and I both expressed our disappointment - actually to each other - that Harry Reid, elected from a high gun owning constituency, despite lip service, had decided to table ANY Senatorial discussions on any restrictions on AR - 15s.

Going on 10 years ago now.

Do you remember any of the board discussions I'm remembering?

Eh... vaguely.

I don't remember discussions about SandyHook being on the ESPN board, and since they happened in 2012, there's no way.

that would've been on the "interim board"... the long forgotten board between this one and ESPN. we were like Hebrews wandering in the desert back then, still searching for the promised land.

Harry Reid was certainly a bad leader.

Like I alluded to before, we need new labels to describe our elected officials... there are those who represent big business, big defense spending, big agriculture, etc. to the detriment of all else... the "owned party"... and the handful of elected officials who aren't owned, and usually don't last long.

Harry Reid belonged to the former.

"Disputes" between owned Democrats and owned Republicans are really no more legit than pro wrestling. it's all "kayfabe."

there really isn't much difference between Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer or Paul Ryan and Nancy Pelosi.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Eh... vaguely.

I don't remember discussions about SandyHook being on the ESPN board, and since they happened in 2012, there's no way.

that would've been on the "interim board"... the long forgotten board between this one and ESPN. we were like Hebrews wandering in the desert back then, still searching for the promised land.

Was it?

In that case, it would have been before there was a separate politics board...and we had these political discussions on the Michigan board, like we used to on ESPN.

Because I distinctly remember people who only post on the Michigan board, and used to be in politics discussions on the Michigan back in the ESPN days, being in that discussion at that time.

 

[Michchamp]

nobody is arguing for psychos rights to own guns. I've said repeatedly that there should be mental health screening as part of background checks for buying guns. I've also said I'm all for banning bump stocks. Most people agree with those. I'm not willing to ban AR-15s or semi-automatics outright. I don't think semiautomatics are the problem nor is banning them the solution. You seem to be conveniently ignoring my position so you can brow beat me with your false sense of moral superiority. I don't care about gun profits and I'm not for unfettered 2nd amendment rights so stop lying about it and arguing against a position I'm not taking.

Also, didn't Adams say the people are the militia? I think even he would make an exception for the crazy ones in today's world.

ban all new sales of assault weapons... no place for them, period.

ban all new sales of handguns... no place for them outside of law enforcement & licensed security guards.

don't seize them, but conduct annual buybacks. at the end of some grace period (5 years? 10 years?) make possession illegal.

shotguns and hunting rifles can be purchased upon completing background checks and a waiting period. ownership must be reported to the police.

This is all just commons sense, and there's Nothing unconstitutional about any of what I proposed.

 

[tinselwolverine]

nobody is arguing for psychos rights to own guns. I've said repeatedly that there should be mental health screening as part of background checks for buying guns. I've also said I'm all for banning bump stocks. Most people agree with those. I'm not willing to ban AR-15s or semi-automatics outright. I don't think semiautomatics are the problem nor is banning them the solution. You seem to be conveniently ignoring my position so you can brow beat me with your false sense of moral superiority. I don't care about gun profits and I'm not for unfettered 2nd amendment rights so stop lying about it and arguing against a position I'm not taking.

Also, didn't Adams say the people are the militia? I think even he would make an exception for the crazy ones in today's world.

I don't know if you're accusing me of this or not...although you did co-quote me, and repeated the term 'unfettered 2nd Amendment rights" that I used in the reference to a board discussion from going on ten years ago, in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, in post #238.

It would have been mid to late December, 2012.

I don't remember you posting anything during that discussion at that time; I guess it was on an interim board between ESPN and this one.

Maybe you were posting under a different handle, I don't know.

Anyway, I don't remember you posting anything, so I guess it doesn't make sense that I would be claiming that you're in favor of unfettered 2nd Amendment rights from a discussion from December 2012 that I don't remember you being part of - that is, if that's the impression that you have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6XwSWjwbvM

 

[tinselwolverine]

I don't know if you're accusing me of this or not...although you did co-quote me, and repeated the term 'unfettered 2nd Amendment rights" that I used in the reference to a board discussion from going on ten years ago, in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, in post #238.

It would have been mid to late December, 2012.

I don't remember you posting anything during that discussion at that time; I guess it was on an interim board between ESPN and this one.

Maybe you were posting under a different handle, I don't know.

Anyway, I don't remember you posting anything, so I guess it doesn't make sense that I would be claiming that you're in favor of unfettered 2nd Amendment rights from a discussion from December 2012 that I don't remember you being part of - that is, if that's the impression that you have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6XwSWjwbvM

EDIT: Oh, shit...in my old age, I've been confusing the 2012 election with the 2008 election, when Obama was first elected.

For all readers, please apply this correction to post #238 also.

Oh that's right...the Heller SCOTUS decision was 2008...that's what got mixed up.

 

[Michchamp]

back in '08... RichRod was going 3-9, and the Michigan ESPN.com board was almost entirely pre-occupied with that... a lot less political talk back then.

 

[Spartanmack]

ban all new sales of assault weapons... no place for them, period.

ban all new sales of handguns... no place for them outside of law enforcement & licensed security guards.

don't seize them, but conduct annual buybacks. at the end of some grace period (5 years? 10 years?) make possession illegal.

shotguns and hunting rifles can be purchased upon completing background checks and a waiting period. ownership must be reported to the police.

This is all just commons sense, and there's Nothing unconstitutional about any of what I proposed.

I'm not for banning semiautomatics or handguns or making possession of them illegal as I do think there is a place for both of them and it has NOTHING to do with gun makers profits. I also don't support gun registries. I don't think the cops have to know who legally possesses firearms. If background checks are done properly, what purpose does that serve that outweighs someone's right to privacy.

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't know if you're accusing me of this or not...although you did co-quote me, and repeated the term 'unfettered 2nd Amendment rights" that I used in the reference to a board discussion from going on ten years ago, in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, in post #238.

It would have been mid to late December, 2012.

I don't remember you posting anything during that discussion at that time; I guess it was on an interim board between ESPN and this one.

Maybe you were posting under a different handle, I don't know.

Anyway, I don't remember you posting anything, so I guess it doesn't make sense that I would be claiming that you're in favor of unfettered 2nd Amendment rights from a discussion from December 2012 that I don't remember you being part of - that is, if that's the impression that you have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6XwSWjwbvM

yeah, I don't know how you got multi-quoted there - my bad. I was on my phone the site was crapping out on me and when it finally looked like it posted I didn't even notice it. It would have made more sense if I accidentally multi-quoted your post where you told MC "you'll get no argument from me there." There you seem to agree with his misguided summary of the two sides of the argument, but that still would have been unintentional. I edited my post to remove yours - 1,000 apologies.

 

[tinselwolverine]

yeah, I don't know how you got multi-quoted there - my bad. I was on my phone the site was crapping out on me and when it finally looked like it posted I didn't even notice it. It would have made more sense if I accidentally multi-quoted your post where you told MC "you'll get no argument from me there." There you seem to agree with his misguided summary of the two sides of the argument, but that still would have been unintentional. I edited my post to remove yours - 1,000 apologies.

I was agreeing with his statement that both Democrats and Republicans are in the pockets of big special interests, be it the NRA, big banks, or whomever else - that was his primary point in the two sentences or so that I quoted, as I read it.

I spend a lot of time on this board defending Republicans primarily because more often Republicans are wrongfully attacked here - people may not believe, but when I hear wrongful attacks on Democrats I defend those Democrats too.

The wrongful attacks are usually from conservatives, but today I would be defending Senator Feinstein actually from the left in her own party for having the audacity for suggesting that Trump might not be Satan.

Also the last major party candidate I voted for president was a Democrat too - John McCain in 2008.

 

[Spartanmack]

I was agreeing with his statement that both Democrats and Republicans are in the pockets of big special interests, be it the NRA, big banks, or whomever else - that was his primary point in the two sentences or so that I quoted, as I read it.

I spend a lot of time on this board defending Republicans primarily because more often Republicans are wrongfully attacked here - people may not believe, but when I hear wrongful attacks on Democrats I defend those Democrats too.

The wrongful attacks are usually from conservatives, but today I would be defending Senator Feinstein actually from the left in her own party for having the audacity for suggesting that Trump might not be Satan.

Also the last major party candidate I voted for president was a Democrat too - John McCain in 2008.

shoot, just realized I left out the most important part of my last post, which was to correct your Taxi Driver clip - you're not the only one here. no matter how much every DSF member, at one time or another has wished that were true, it simply isn't..

 

[tinselwolverine]

shoot, just realized I left out the most important part of my last post, which was to correct your Taxi Driver clip - you're not the only one here. no matter how much every DSF member, at one time or another has wished that were true, it simply isn't..

Yeah, it wasn't true with DeNeiro either - there were sound technicians and probably 20-30 PAs and a whole bunch of other people, not just the cameraman - who one would assume would have been the one DeNeiro was talking to,

 

[turok]

We pause this mutual stroke-fest for this important message:

Trump continues to bloviate about the Parkland massacre, claiming yesterday that he would have "run" into the school even unarmed...this coming from an alleged CiC who was a draft dodger and obtained 4 college deferments and a medical exemption b/c of "bone spurs" ...but while also having actively participated in college sporting events.

Then his mail-order trophy wife Melancholia gives a speech to the wives of state governors, reaffirming her goal of eliminating cyber-bullying, this despite her notorious Twitter troll husband recently tweeting about a female NY Senator, Kirstin Giliibrand being willing to perform sexual favors in exchange for campaign funding.

 

[Spartanmack]

Trump continues to bloviate about the Parkland massacre, claiming yesterday that he would have "run" into the school even unarmed...this coming from an alleged CiC who was a draft dodger and obtained 4 college deferments and a medical exemption b/c of "bone spurs" ...but while having also having actively participated in college sporting events.

Then his mail-order trophy wife Melancholia gives a speech to the wives of state governors, reaffiming her goal of eliminating cyber-bulliyng, this despite her notorious Twitter troll husband recently tweeting about a female NY Senator, Kirstin Giliibrand being willing to perform sexual favors in exchange for campaign funding.

give it a rest, at this point your desire for hatred of Trump just sounds desperate.

 

[turok]

Donnie Dinkydigits is a rich narcissist and nepotist source of virtually unending hypocrisy, prevarication, gas-lighting, denial, delusion, and arrogance. I certainly won't be silenced, virtually or otherwise.



#stupidcallousfascistnihilistictweetingallatrocio.us

 

[Gulo Blue]

give it a rest, at this point your desire for hatred of Trump just sounds desperate.

I also thought the "I would run in" statement was mind blowingly stupid. Especially with that Howard Stern audio that's been recirculating about how disgusted he was when an old guy fell and was bleeding.

 

[Michchamp]

We pause this mutual stroke-fest for this important message:

Trump continues to bloviate about the Parkland massacre, claiming yesterday that he would have "run" into the school even unarmed...this coming from an alleged CiC who was a draft dodger and obtained 4 college deferments and a medical exemption b/c of "bone spurs" ...but while also having actively participated in college sporting events.

Then his mail-order trophy wife Melancholia gives a speech to the wives of state governors, reaffirming her goal of eliminating cyber-bullying, this despite her notorious Twitter troll husband recently tweeting about a female NY Senator, Kirstin Giliibrand being willing to perform sexual favors in exchange for campaign funding.

on twitter, someone posted this pic in response to his fake tough guy routine:

I don't need my president to be an action hero, but I also wish this stupid asshole would shut the fuck up. He's easily the biggest coward ever to hold the office.