A student killed his father before gunning down at least 15 others at a Prague university, Czech authorities said, adding the gunman had also been “eliminated”.
If you follow the constitution, the right to bear arms is for a well regulated militia. Not for a stressed 18 year old buying an AR-15 at Walmart to shoot up rioters from another state.
You might not like where that logic goes. The Supreme Court took a stance in United States v. Miller (1939) that the NFA’s provisions on short barreled shotguns could be enforced on the basis that it’s not a weapon that would be used by a well-regulated militia.
That brings us to a conclusion that literally nobody likes. The government could ban shorty shotguns and .22 rimfire, because those aren’t militia weapons. It could not ban fully automatic weapons or even rocket launchers.
We have to come up with something.
I am a gun owner.
There are legitimate uses for them.
But a rifle marksman course requirement?
Gun safety classes?
30 day waiting period?
Mental health screening?
Accountability if you buy it for someone else who uses it to commit violence?
Anything?
Something has to stop the senseless violence.
I know that it won’t stop it.
People in Brittain use knives… Acid in the middle east.
The difference there is that the harm is limited to a few people and not these mass casualty events.
Hey don’t cry about unborn babies but be pro school shootings there bud. The founders had single shot musket rifles not semi automatic rifles. If you want to be constructionist then ban the sale of anything other than breach loaders with separate shell and powder charge and have a good day.
First off, I’m pro-choice. I’m just not an ignorant naive tool like you seem to be. The founders weren’t idiots they knew tech wasn’t going to stop, you could also own warships during those days, the equivalent of owning a nuclear attack sub basically. If you think the 2nd only applies to single shot muskets, then the Internet isn’t covered by the first amendment in your mind. Being ignorant of history doesn’t magically make you correct.
If people learned how to defend themselves and then also everyone knew how to use them suddenly gun culture changes and it’s like a tool instead of a status symbol. If you don’t want to serve, there are non-combat roles. If you don’t like it then hey maybe you should invent bullet proof kids.
I wish they’d bring back the draft. Draft men and women over the age of 18 for like two years; it doesn’t need to be for combat roles either. You get job training, you learn self-discipline, how to work in a team, really a lot of life skills. And then when your enlistment is up, you get training on how to find a job, how to write a resume, how to pass an interview, you get to use the GI bill and (in my hypothetical scenario) would keep Tricare. And more people would care about where and when we deploy our military, because they actually have a stake in it now.
Mandatory conscription is probably my most “out there” political belief. I think the benefits would be vast! I don’t think it would prevent mass shootings in America, though.
Conscription doesn’t mean war.
It means being prepared.
And yes maybe we could be more prepared to deal with this stupidity and remove the gun culture if it wasn’t special anymore.
I think one of the benefits would be less war since every citizen would be personally affected by it. Also all the public works and infrastructure. And healthcare. It could be great! Maybe it would help with all the “lonely men” culture that we hear so much about, and likely plays into some of the gun culture. I guess we’ll never know since that won’t happen here, though.
🧐
Switzerland does well with guns.
In Switzerland, everyone is trained to use guns
I don’t think lack of training was this guys issue.
Switzerland also has heavily regulated ammunition. You can’t just go to the store and buy some bullets, like in Czechia
Like Chris Rocks stand up. Charge more for the bullets and people will think more about killing. paraphrase
Very true
Swiss:
vs Czech:
source
The Swiss solution really is what should be followed.
The solution to allow gun ownership is conscription?
No thanks.
If you follow the constitution, the right to bear arms is for a well regulated militia. Not for a stressed 18 year old buying an AR-15 at Walmart to shoot up rioters from another state.
You might not like where that logic goes. The Supreme Court took a stance in United States v. Miller (1939) that the NFA’s provisions on short barreled shotguns could be enforced on the basis that it’s not a weapon that would be used by a well-regulated militia.
That brings us to a conclusion that literally nobody likes. The government could ban shorty shotguns and .22 rimfire, because those aren’t militia weapons. It could not ban fully automatic weapons or even rocket launchers.
We have to come up with something. I am a gun owner. There are legitimate uses for them. But a rifle marksman course requirement? Gun safety classes? 30 day waiting period? Mental health screening? Accountability if you buy it for someone else who uses it to commit violence? Anything?
Something has to stop the senseless violence.
I know that it won’t stop it.
People in Brittain use knives… Acid in the middle east.
The difference there is that the harm is limited to a few people and not these mass casualty events.
Yes totally forgot about that the people part…go read some federalist papers and a few history books the 2nd is for the people not the militia.
Hey don’t cry about unborn babies but be pro school shootings there bud. The founders had single shot musket rifles not semi automatic rifles. If you want to be constructionist then ban the sale of anything other than breach loaders with separate shell and powder charge and have a good day.
Isn’t California doing something like that?
First off, I’m pro-choice. I’m just not an ignorant naive tool like you seem to be. The founders weren’t idiots they knew tech wasn’t going to stop, you could also own warships during those days, the equivalent of owning a nuclear attack sub basically. If you think the 2nd only applies to single shot muskets, then the Internet isn’t covered by the first amendment in your mind. Being ignorant of history doesn’t magically make you correct.
If people learned how to defend themselves and then also everyone knew how to use them suddenly gun culture changes and it’s like a tool instead of a status symbol. If you don’t want to serve, there are non-combat roles. If you don’t like it then hey maybe you should invent bullet proof kids.
I wish they’d bring back the draft. Draft men and women over the age of 18 for like two years; it doesn’t need to be for combat roles either. You get job training, you learn self-discipline, how to work in a team, really a lot of life skills. And then when your enlistment is up, you get training on how to find a job, how to write a resume, how to pass an interview, you get to use the GI bill and (in my hypothetical scenario) would keep Tricare. And more people would care about where and when we deploy our military, because they actually have a stake in it now.
The only way someone should be allowed to own a gun is after rigorous training, like in the military.
Only then do you have “good guy with a gun”
So the problem was this guy wasn’t trained enough?
Thanks, funniest comment today
Mandatory conscription is probably my most “out there” political belief. I think the benefits would be vast! I don’t think it would prevent mass shootings in America, though.
Conscription doesn’t mean war. It means being prepared. And yes maybe we could be more prepared to deal with this stupidity and remove the gun culture if it wasn’t special anymore.
I think one of the benefits would be less war since every citizen would be personally affected by it. Also all the public works and infrastructure. And healthcare. It could be great! Maybe it would help with all the “lonely men” culture that we hear so much about, and likely plays into some of the gun culture. I guess we’ll never know since that won’t happen here, though.
deleted by creator
I bet those dead university students enjoyed all that constitutional freedom.