Umpqua

[Oh_That_Guy]

This is almost as dumb a take as anything busybody has said in this thread, and that ain't easy.

This won't have any more effect on the campaign than the white supremacist murders in Charleston have had. There are too many of these shootings for anyone to logically conclude that one demographic is uniquely responsible for them all.

But you're saying that in a thread where several people absolutely conclude that.

 

[hazbeen]

Ha, the media is only showing pics of him.....3 yr old pics, why?

We know why

 

[anchoredinocean]

Oops!





http://i.imgur.com/Xj1DLeB.jpg

 

[Oh_That_Guy]

I'd be more worried about him being on MySpace than anything.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

You are right. A loaded term, as it were, and I withdraw it. 'Focus'? Unusually high levels of gun crime compared with other first world countries, shall we say?

Anyway, it was a constitutional point about placing within the Bill of Rights. Most advocates of gun freedom (I am trying to be neutral here), or very limited restrictions on gun ownership, see the second amendment without the important first section: 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State'. Only the last part, for example, is quoted by the NRA on the side of its buildings, etc.

Furthermore, such advocates see the second amendment as following on from the first amendment, in that it guarantees a personal freedom. As such, the right to bear arms is one with the freedom of speech, association, etc, etc.

Other constitutionalists, however, and with as much justification ( I say no more), see the second amendment linked far more closely in spirit with the entirely uncontroversial third amendment: 'No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.' If, in short, we see 1+2 as linked together, with the uncontroversial 3 a hangover from Revolutionary times and no longer relevant, we are likely to see gun freedom as fundamental to our sense of individual liberty. If, on the other hand, we see 1 as the amendment dealing with personal, individual freedoms, and 2+3 linked together as corporate freedoms relating to self-defence against a regular standing army, then we are likely to see gun freedom as fundamentally less essential, and standing on far weaker ground, than the first group.

I have not expressed it as well as he did, of course, and I expect you have heard it before. But for me it was an interesting angle.

I am dutifully impressed that you run in circles which allow you to personally converse with foreign diplomats, but assuming you have quoted Ambassador Barzun accurately, his "angle" might be interesting to you, but it is pathetically ignorant for a person of his purported standing and has no basis whatsoever in Constitutional law. Furthermore, the President should revoke his credentials and recall him immediately to the United States for dispensing thoroughly inaccurate history and legal theory.

The authoritative scope of the Second Amendment has NEVER been linked to either the First or Third Amendments in ANY federal court opinion. Rather, Constitutional analysis has always centered on the prefatory clause for the necessity of a "well regulated militia" in concert with the operative clause of an implied existing individual "right to keep and bear arms."

These two elements have also been frequently analyzed in the context of the proper roll and function of colonial militias AND the well-accepted individual right of self-protection and hunting for both sport and sustenance that was unarguably a fact of American frontier life.

Legal scholars in opposition to the existence of an individual right like to view the prefatory clause of the Second Amendment as a narrow condition which restricts the right of gun ownership to a single specific purpose and no other. The Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller summarily repudiated that argument, and the basis of its landmark opinion is easily and irrefutably understood by reading the case syllabus at this link.

But even if the Court had agreed with the argument that the intent of the framers was to acknowledge the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" for the alleged restrictive purpose, a further strong argument can be made that, like ANY right affirmed or codified by the Constitution, once established by the document, the right, LIKE THE DOCUMENT, can only be amended or repealed by the lawful process defined by the Constitution itself.

The RIGHT, whether created by the document or merely recognized as having been long existent in common law history, does not disappear simply because the NEED has arguably been diminished or no longer exists. The RIGHT remains.

As the Court correctly held, the right to keep and bear arms is not infringed by mere regulation as to time, place and manner for ownership and use. But you will certainly find no reference in the opinion to the First or Third Amendment.

On behalf of the United States, I extend my personal apologies to you and the Court of St. James. You clearly did not receive our "best and brightest" in the form of Ambassador Barzun.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Oops!





http://i.imgur.com/Xj1DLeB.jpg

Another Good Boy eruption.

 

[DesEsseintes]

^^ just so English of you and why we had to kick your asses twice AND come save you in two world wars. You understand the 2nd amendment as much as your ancestors understood the colonies.

I don't know if you had a chance to read the preamble, but that wasn't my understanding. It was the reading of the American ambassador, Matthew Barzun. I was merely passing it on.

I'll not delve into your understanding of history, since I don't think we are likely to agree.

 

[hazbeen]

In 12-Min Speech to America About Mass Shooting, Obama Refers to Himself 28 Times...

 

[hazbeen]

Oregon College Gunman Identified As Chris Harper Mercer- Update: Only Two Myspace Friends, One Who Praises Islamic Terrorists, Urges Killing Of Jews-Update: Admired Black Gay Killer Who Shot Journalists On Live T.V.

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.16.30 PM

Obama is already politicizing without even knowing the facts behind it. If the students said they were Christians, the shooter shot them in the head.

Via Washington Times:

Chris Harper Mercer, 26, has been identified as the gunman who killed nine people on Thursday at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon, according to news reports.

Mercer was killed in a shootout with Douglas County sheriff’s deputies, according to Sheriff John Hanlin.

Mercer reportedly was not a student at the college. The New York Times, quoting law enforcement officials, reported that he lived in the Roseburg area.

Mercer reportedly demanded to know the religions of those around him before opening fire.

Four guns — three handguns and a long gun — were reportedly found at the scene.

Here’s another view:
Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.27.28 PM

Update:
Mercer still has a Myspace up, with two connections, a man and a woman. The man, Mahmoud Ali Ehsani, appears to have a great passion for Islamists, posting multiple pictures of ‘Mujahideen’ from every country with Islamic terrorists and saying ‘kill the Jews’.
Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.58.41 PM
Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.58.49 PM

Update:
Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 10.54.18 PM

He appeared to be enamored of the IRA. He also praised Roanoke killed Vester Flanagan:

Mercer admired black gay killer Vester Flanagan who shot the reporter and cameraman on live T.V.:

In a blog linked to that identity, Harper-Mercer expressed admiration for Roanoke shooter Vester Flanagan.

People “like him have nothing left to live for,” Harper-Mercer wrote on August 31. “On an interesting note, I have noticed that so many people like him are all alone and unknown, yet when they spill a little blood, the whole world knows who they are. … A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you’re in the limelight. “

 

[Que]

“On an interesting note, I have noticed that so many people like him are all alone and unknown, yet when they spill a little blood, the whole world knows who they are. … A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you’re in the limelight. “

That is undoubtedly why he did it, and why his name, his writings and everything about him should never be discussed.

Press release should be, "Loser thought he would get national attention for killing people so we are neither releasing his name, or his picture or anything about him, ever. After autopsy he will be cremated, his ashes disposed of, and all traces of his existence will be removed"

 

[Lancecastor]

But but but.... In death, a member of project mayhem shall have a name.

 

[Que]

But but but.... In death, a member of project mayhem shall have a name.

Which is why my idea would never work. He'd have other losers whispering his name in loser cloisters.

That, and Americans tend to think that the First Amendment means it is a good idea for us to know about everything, because we can.

A large contingent believes in doing a lot of things "for the greater good" but censoring the content exploited for the selling of poptarts and toothpaste with breathless, full of detail (even if they have to make it up) play-by-play body counts is a bridge too far.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I think you need to adjust your numbers per capita...



Remember, a vast nation of over 300 million will always look like it has more of everything.

 

[DesEsseintes]

I think you need to adjust your numbers per capita...



Remember, a vast nation of over 300 million will always look like it has more of everything.

Latest figures per 100,000.

USA: 10.64 (2013 figures).
UK: 0.26 (2010).

The US rate is almost 41 times higher, per capita.

To put in another way, and still in per capita numbers: in an average year for both countries, by 9th January the US has already hit the British gun death rate for the whole year. And Britain is, economically, socially and culturally one of the closest, if not the closest, country to America. It's almost a perfect scientific control case.

 

[Lancecastor]

The USA is a country born with a gun in its hand, a country founded by revolution against government authority and steeped in the blood of its own brutal civil war atrocities.

It has great marketing propoganda, but its a shithole.

ick.

 

[toubab]

Latest figures per 100,000.

USA: 10.64 (2013 figures).
UK: 0.26 (2010).

The US rate is almost 41 times higher, per capita.

The number of Americans killed in these mass killings is tiny compared to the total population. Yes, it's a very bad thing when some nutcase with a gun or guns kills nine innocent people in a case such as this, but there's no reason to blow it all out of proportion. The risk of becoming a victim in such a case is very, very small, in reality.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Latest figures per 100,000.

USA: 10.64 (2013 figures).
UK: 0.26 (2010).

The US rate is almost 41 times higher, per capita.

To put in another way, and still in per capita numbers: in an average year for both countries, by 9th January the US has already hit the British gun death rate for the whole year. And Britain is, economically, socially and culturally one of the closest, if not the closest, country to America. It's almost a perfect scientific control case.

There can be no cogent rebuttal to a few bare numbers with no context as to what they may, or may not represent or any sourcing to go find what they actually represent.

:shrug:

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Machts nichts.

Half wanna ban guns, half wanna excuse killers as insane and incompetent and immune from consequences.

 

[kbate]

Latest figures per 100,000.

USA: 10.64 (2013 figures).
UK: 0.26 (2010).

The US rate is almost 41 times higher, per capita.

To put in another way, and still in per capita numbers: in an average year for both countries, by 9th January the US has already hit the British gun death rate for the whole year. And Britain is, economically, socially and culturally one of the closest, if not the closest, country to America. It's almost a perfect scientific control case.

You attribute that entirely to 'easy access to guns'?

Crime/Violence wise, England is nothing like the US. England has had limited weapons since Hadrian; the US never has. England has been a welfare state since the second war, the US has just begun its venture into complete welfare.

The people of England are much more accepting of government decree than those of the US ever have been or ever will be. The indoctrination of conformity begins early in English education, but is absent in much of America.

We are not that alike.

Even immigration has been vastly different over the decades. We took in everyone, you sent your rabble out to the world, either as soldiers or as convicts.

 

[Que]

All you say about living lives online and the ludicrous (sic) nature of modern society is also true of European countries and other developed nations. American kids are no more fucked-up, alienated, angry or depressed than British ones. But the British ones do not have anything like such easy access to guns.

Of course people kill people. But without guns it is far, far harder. Honestly, for all the obfuscation, it is as simple as that.

It's logically perfectly sound to say that the adherence to the second amendment is more important than saving hundreds of thousands of lives over the coming decades. That's fine. But be aware that is the choice. And all the rest - all the vigils and the prayers and the soul-searching and the 'never agains' are just so much background music to the endless scrolling statistics.

Some things - some freedoms - really are more important than life, or else what is the point of living? If the second amendment is one that Americans feel is one of those 'give me liberty or give me death' things, then fair enough. But then cut out all the false debates.

Your population similarity to ours ends where some of your population self-selected and left. You also do not have a couple of centuries of slavery, followed by urbanization of freed slaves, followed by stark unemployment and the war on drugs. We are also importing by the thousand violent children from latin america. They recruit killers on playgrounds. Of course the machette deaths are not figured into our gun statistics, but payback against MS-13 is usually done with a gun.

Leaving that aside, you make it a ridiculously flawed either/or choice. Abandon the 2nd amendment which only disarms people that follow the law anyway, or give in to violence.

Mexico has exactly one legal gun shop. It is located in Mexico City. For all practical purposes, almost no private, Mexican Citizen can purchase or possess a gun. And no, they don't get them from the US. They did during fast and furious but that was so that the anti-gun nuts in the current administrations could try and defeat my above argument. Mostly they use guns stolen from police and military. Also a lot of imported Chinese AK47, AK74, and SKS. And cheap chinese handguns by the cargo container-full. They have a rate of violence involving guns that far exceeds the US. Maybe you have heard of the troubles? The IRA had little trouble obtaining weaponry and you live on an actual island.

We have a sensationalization and glorification of violence problem. Access to guns is the least of it. We have about a gun for every citizen in America. Repeal the 2nd amendment tomorrow order mass confiscation and you could not possibly make a dent in 300 million guns.

 

[Equinoxe]

I don't know if you had a chance to read the preamble, but that wasn't my understanding. It was the reading of the American ambassador, Matthew Barzun. I was merely passing it on.

I'll not delve into your understanding of history, since I don't think we are likely to agree.

You'll have to forgive him. There's a disease endemic to much of the US that causes seemingly ordinary Americans to become inexplicably obnoxious towards foreigners when discussing America.

That is undoubtedly why he did it, and why his name, his writings and everything about him should never be discussed.

Press release should be, "Loser thought he would get national attention for killing people so we are neither releasing his name, or his picture or anything about him, ever. After autopsy he will be cremated, his ashes disposed of, and all traces of his existence will be removed"

Consider how well that worked for Ephesus.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

A lot depends upon how you massage the definitions in the statistics that you are about to use:

http://crimeresearch.org/2014/03/comparing-murder-rates-across-countries/
http://people.howstuffworks.com/strict-gun-laws-less-crime1.htm

Another thing that should be closely examined is where does American Violence occur? It mainly occurs in those areas where the Liberal thought on guns is closer to the European (mainly English) school of thought, the big cities and the university campuses. Where the rest of us live, it is much more rare because we have not been Feralized by government largess, progress, wars on human behavior (drugs) and moral relativism that condones and endorses the worst inclinations of our "minority" populations.

But we see the football hooligans, their violence and their anti-semitic race-baiting and we know that the violence, sans the gun, is most likely comparable.

 

[Que]

Latest figures per 100,000.

USA: 10.64 (2013 figures).
UK: 0.26 (2010).

The US rate is almost 41 times higher, per capita.

To put in another way, and still in per capita numbers: in an average year for both countries, by 9th January the US has already hit the British gun death rate for the whole year. And Britain is, economically, socially and culturally one of the closest, if not the closest, country to America. It's almost a perfect scientific control case.

On ADHD alone which is a pretty good marker for population compulsivity, people with ADHD, self-selected out of your population and came to America. Even in America, the incidence of ADHD, is much higher in the West were, again, an impulsive portion of the population self-selected to move into a much more hazardous environment.

Never mind the stark cultural differences, the actually biological differences between those who remained and those who left have got to be noteworthy especially as it pertains to risk-taking behavior.

Our nearest population control would be Austrailia, that does not share a land mass with a violent, impoverished Latin America, and did not import enslaved, tribesman from Africa.

 

[BabblingBrooke]

But but but.... In death, a member of project mayhem shall have a name.

I don't think you're supposed to talk about that.

 

[kbate]

Oregon College Gunman Identified As Chris Harper Mercer- Update: Only Two Myspace Friends, One Who Praises Islamic Terrorists, Urges Killing Of Jews-Update: Admired Black Gay Killer Who Shot Journalists On Live T.V.

Myspace friends? Does anyone still have a myspace friend? Two seems a lot if you're still on Myspace.