Quiet, Almost too quiet

[onejayhawk]

Fascists certainly don't seem averse to guns, that's for sure. It's almost like their signature trait.

As noted, Nazi aversion was specific against the lower classes, Jews gypsies and such. Note however, how they dealt with the brownshirts, who were their semi official sponsors.

J

 

[JollyRoger]

Limited to militias? Not according to present or past SCOTUS ruling, no.

The most current scope of the "right" according to SCOTUS is the individual privilege to apply for a license to keep a handgun in the home for self-defense purposes. That application for a license can be turned down for a number of reasons.

 

[Farm Boy]

Yup yup!

 

[Paul in Saudi]

14) 16 June, 2014 Chesterfield County, VA, 4 killed

Total Incidents 14
Total killed 61

 

[Bugfatty300]

Fascists certainly don't seem averse to guns, that's for sure. It's almost like their signature trait.

Being non-adverse to guns would be the neutral position. Though I don't see a correlation with fascism in either case.

 

[Borachio]

Is it possible for an armed man to be truly neutral?

I wasn't trying to suggest that fascists are the only ones who aren't averse to guns, btw. Just that pacifism and fascism are extremely uneasy bedfellows.

 

[BenitoChavez]

The way it was explained to me in college was that it is a simple comma that makes all the difference in the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.

That comma between "state" and "the" makes the part about militias and the part about keeping and bearing arms two separate ideas. So according to my professor the 2nd Amendment guarantees two rights: The right to form a militia and the right to keep and bear arms. Now if that comma was not there then we would only have the right to form militias and only militia members could keep and bear arms.

Determining the meaning of a sentence based on a comma seems like a very silly thing to do. As a native English speaker I'm not even sure of all the rules associated with commas, as such they tend to go wherever I feel like they should go or sometimes, in random, places. I'd wager that there are many others, including some of the founders of America that take a similar stance toward something as insignificant as commas.

Also there are apparently two versions of the 2nd amendment, one with more commas and one with less. The significance of those commas is beyond me.

There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with capitalization or punctuation differences. Differences exist between the drafted and ratified copies, the signed copies on display, and various published transcriptions.[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] The importance (or lack thereof) of these differences has been the source of debate regarding the meaning and interpretation of the amendment, particularly regarding the importance of the prefatory clause.

One version was passed by the Congress,[24][25][26][27][28]

As passed by the Congress and preserved in the National Archives:[29]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, then-Secretary of State:[30]

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The original hand-written copy of the Bill of Rights, approved by the House and Senate, was prepared by scribe William Lambert and resides in the National Archives.

 

[Farm Boy]

Legislative intent and judicial review is either a field entirely centered around something so insignificant as commas and the like, or it is a field entirely centered around what justices had for breakfast in the morning, or it is a field entirely centered around popular politics and we can get rid of the vestigial but once-useful lie regarding there being a degree of judicial impartiality.

 

[onejayhawk]

Is it possible for an armed man to be truly neutral?

I wasn't trying to suggest that fascists are the only ones who aren't averse to guns, btw. Just that pacifism and fascism are extremely uneasy bedfellows.

What about an unarmed man that is not opposed to having an armed neighbor? That would be me.

Fascists were averse to guns--in the hands of dissidents.

J

 

[Cheetah]

@Paul: I guess you've seen this, but I thought I should just add it anyway:

http://everytown.org/article/schoolshootings/

 

[Paul in Saudi]

Thank you, no I did not see this. I wonder if they will keep it up-to-date.

Shootings in schools are school shootings. The idea that most "do not count" because they did not involve a an intentional killing of or by students shows you how far down the rabbit hole we have already gone.

But I shall try to keep to my simpler project. I am tracking killings of four or more people by a single killer using a gun in one "emotional event." I have already made enough mistakes to show how limited my skills are.

 

[Cheetah]

Oh, by all means, continue. It's a very interesting project!

I just thought you'd find the link useful, in case some events could have slipped you by.

 

[Borachio]

Fascists were averse to guns--in the hands of dissidents.

Sure. Sure. I agree.

 

[Paul in Saudi]

2014 Mass Killing in USA

1) 16 January 2014 Spanish Fork UT, 5 killed
2) 3 February 2014 Cypress TX, 4 killed
3) 6 February 2014 Defiance OH, 4 dead
4) 20 February 2014 Indianapolis IN, 4 killed
5) 20 February 2014 Alturas, CA, 4 killed
6) 24 February 2014 Glade Springs VA 4 killed
7) 26 February 2014 Oak Lawn IL, 4 killed.
8) 2 April 2014 Fort Hood, TX, 4 killed
9) 3 May 2014 Jonesboro AK 4 killed
10) 9 May 2014 Tampa FL 4 killed
11) 9 May 2014 Pomona, CA 4 killed
12) 24 May 2014 Goleta, CA, 7 killed
13) 8 June 2014 San Carlos Park, FL, 5 killed
14) 16 June, 2014 Chesterfield County, VA, 4 killed
15) 9 July 2014 Spring, TX, 6 killed


Total Incidents 15
Total killed 67

This update removes two incidents where there were in fact more than one shooter.

I think we can see a pattern. These sort of shootings are not evil drug gang shootings. Most of them seem to be domestic violence. In the most recent entry a fellow went nuts and killed five children and his wife.

 

[nc-1701]

I think we can see a pattern. These sort of shootings are not evil drug gang shootings. Most of them seem to be domestic violence. In the most recent entry a fellow went nuts and killed five children and his wife.

Honestly I don't think the domestic violence shootings should even count. As far as causes and interest they are in an entirely different category than Columbine style spree shootings. Finally their deadliness is really just a function of the size of the family rather than the efficacy of the shooter.

 

[JollyRoger]

The domestic shootings does show a significant infringement though -if the shooter has a criminal history, there cannot legally be a weapon in his household that his family could use for self defense.

 

[Paul in Saudi]

Well, the rules are abitrary but neutral. Even if you think that (for some reason) family slaughter ought not to be included, other events are excluded, even if I think they ought to make the list. The incident in Nevada recently is not included as there were two shooters. The events in California included both shooting (which count) and stabbings (which do not count).

 

[peter grimes]

Why shouldn't domestic violence count? If you remove domestic violence, would that also remove a Sandy Hook sort of event since the kid first shot his own mother?

 

[Paul in Saudi]

I dunno. I also do not understand this idea that shootings in a school are not school shootings.

 

[peter grimes]

To my mind - and I realize this isn't the point of your project - a death due to gunfire is a death due to gunfire, whether it's a suicide, an accident, a berzerker, domestic violence, or anything else.

But that's just me.

EDIT: oh, I saw a thing on reddit that German police only fired 8 or 80 bullets last year, and, well, you can guess how many the US fired. yuck.