(03-29-2023 08:15 PM)JDTulane Wrote: (03-29-2023 08:12 PM)200yrs2late Wrote: (03-29-2023 04:55 PM)JDTulane Wrote: Taking books from one hand and placing a gun in the other. And we wonder why there are more shootings. Sad trend.
Who did the taking, and who did the placing?
Sent from my SM-G990U2 using Tapatalk
Both sides are guilty of censorship and both sides are guilty of promoting bad legislation that has led to a bevy of unaccounted for or inappropriately carried firearms and severly untreated or mistreated mental health. This is a bipartisan issue with bipartisan failure.
Mostly agree. So how do we get party A to stop proposing legislation that demonstrably does next to nothing to prevent criminals and the mentally ill from accessing firearms but does place ever increasing burdens on the millions upon millions of lawful gun owners which of course forces party B to point to the constitution and shout "you can't do that!"?
Biden wasted no time in calling for congress to pass his gun legislation which I believe includes the ever vague "assault weapons ban". It was distasteful to pounce so quickly and make this partisan and political, but foe the moment let's assume a new assault weapons ban is enacted. We all know that the millions of weapons that would fall under such an ambiguous classification aren't going to be forfeited or taken off the streets. How does that stop the next shooting? Magazine capacity and fire rate didn't factor into this shooting, someone could have done the same with a lever action rifle. What's next, ban all firearms?
The media had twisted this to make the shooter the victim in less than 24 hrs. Some hinted at it, others were quite blatant about it. Some elected officials seemed to support the shooters actions. Just last week a media platform was used to suggest that killing Christian conservatives was an acceptable course of action rather than the already violent shouting down of speakers.
There are already indications that this won't be pursued as a hate crime or domestic terrorism even though the shooter left a manifesto. That manifesto either needs to be published to show the was a personal attack on an individual and the school/victims were collateral, or if it demonstrates this was a hate crime/domestic terrorism then it needs to be pursued as such. If party A is hesitant to apply the law evenly, then party B is going to dig their heels in even harder against new legislation they know won't be properly and fairly applied.
Lots of wasted time and effort arguing against one another, partly because the two sides don't speak the same language or share a common vision for the future of the country.
Sent from my SM-G990U2 using Tapatalk