High school shooting in Parkland FL

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You're talking to another working military historian. I've provided research content for a vet who owns two WWII blogs. Here's one. http://www.comandosupremo.com/ I also ran three separate columns on American Revolution history (and am also currently writing a book set in Boston during the American Revolution) for roughly a decade. I also provide content for the local historical society. I don't see what any of that has to do with having a low opinion of anything. Gun happy tough guys shouldn't be the only people with a voice in this discussion just because they think they're better than other people. Actually make an argument supporting your position instead of slinging around your vet/police status as if it automatically makes you right.

All bearing in mind of course that I'm pretty gun happy myself. I enjoy playing with guns. I think they're a pretty effective tool for the police. I simply think you're being a dick, which started with your ridiculous strawman pages back. It's interesting because I never noticed you having this type of attitude before. Maybe I wasn't paying attention.

Blogs. Nice. I own Hyperwar. And PHA. And a few more sites. 

And I'm reminded on antivaxxers when I read some of things posted here. SSDD.

[Shell B]

You're talking to another working military historian. I've provided research content for a vet who owns two WWII blogs. Here's one. http://www.comandosupremo.com/ I also ran three separate columns on American Revolution history (and am also currently writing a book set in Boston during the American Revolution) for roughly a decade. I also provide content for the local historical society. I don't see what any of that has to do with having a low opinion of anything. Gun happy tough guys shouldn't be the only people with a voice in this discussion just because they think they're better than other people. Actually make an argument supporting your position instead of slinging around your vet/police status as if it automatically makes you right.

All bearing in mind of course that I'm pretty gun happy myself. I enjoy playing with guns. I think they're a pretty effective tool for the police. I simply think you're being a dick, which started with your ridiculous strawman pages back. It's interesting because I never noticed you having this type of attitude before. Maybe I wasn't paying attention.

Blogs. Nice. I own Hyperwar. And PHA. And a few more sites. 

And I'm reminded on antivaxxers when I read some of things posted here. SSDD.

So you own a blog too? Good for you. Gawd and you're site looks like absolute shite. I don't say that because you're already being a prick. I say that because it needs help. You do realize that slapping a domain name on a site that literally only has public domain documents and none of your original content that I can see, and according to the Library of Congress, doesn't make it any more official, right? So, you think a site that looks like this http://www.comandosupremo.com/the-breda-model-35.html is somehow not as good as yours? Trust me, it's better, and that's a piece I wrote, btw.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

I think you may have gotten the idea that I think our police should be unarmed and unprotected. That's not what I said. I said as long as they are armed, and the government is armed, I do feel like people should have the right to bear arms with an encyclopedia of restrictions that are heavily enforced.

---

If the government keeps trying to impose all of these gun laws the people in New Hampshire are going to get ticked off and exercise their constitutional right to have a revolution.

[Art.] 2-a. [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.
December 1, 1982

"[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
June 2, 1784"
https://constitution.com/new-hampshire-s...-17842007/

Have you noticed that New Hampshire doesn't have gangs of thug cops shooting people willy-nilly?

[Joods]

The ONLY thing I was trying to address was the cocky nature in which I believe GS was saying that LEO doesn't have military grade weapons, such as "grenade launchers". Those were his words specifically. I was showing proof that he was wrong. I wasn't needing to go any further into it. He made a claim and I provided proof that he was incorrect.

I don't claim to be an expert, nor is that a requirement for me to be a part of my own fucking thread. It's not that hard to find relevant information. One only has to look. And that's what I did.

[Shell B]

I think you may have gotten the idea that I think our police should be unarmed and unprotected. That's not what I said. I said as long as they are armed, and the government is armed, I do feel like people should have the right to bear arms with an encyclopedia of restrictions that are heavily enforced.

---

If the government keeps trying to impose all of these gun laws the people in New Hampshire are going to get ticked off and exercise their constitutional right to have a revolution.

[Art.] 2-a. [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.
December 1, 1982

"[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
June 2, 1784"
https://constitution.com/new-hampshire-s...-17842007/

Have you noticed that New Hampshire doesn't have gangs of thug cops shooting people willy-nilly?

Do you live in or near New Hampshire?

[Amarok]

Their was a mass shooting in new hampshire in 1997 . And thou gun homicide rates are low in the state gun exported elsewhere used in violent crimes is high . And using a gun to threaten a government body over a law you don't like could be considered lawlessness .

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Blogs. Nice. I own Hyperwar. And PHA. And a few more sites. 

And I'm reminded on antivaxxers when I read some of things posted here. SSDD.

So you own a blog too? Good for you. Gawd and you're site looks like absolute shite. I don't say that because you're already being a prick. I say that because it needs help. You do realize that slapping a domain name on a site that literally only has public domain documents and none of your original content that I can see, and according to the Library of Congress, doesn't make it any more official, right? So, you think a site that looks like this http://www.comandosupremo.com/the-breda-model-35.html is somehow not as good as yours? Trust me, it's better, and that's a piece I wrote, btw.

It's not a blog, dumbass, it's an archive. We've been putting items online for 25 years now.

[Tiberius]

Was there a violent revolution when fully automatic weapons were banned? No.

Why should there be one when all people are asking for is better background checks and restrictions to try and prevent mass shootings?

[Shell B]

The ONLY thing I was trying to address was the cocky nature in which I believe GS was saying that LEO doesn't have military grade weapons, such as "grenade launchers". Those were his words specifically. I was showing proof that he was wrong. I wasn't needing to go any further into it. He made a claim and I provided proof that he was incorrect.

I don't claim to be an expert, nor is that a requirement for me to be a part of my own fucking thread. It's not that hard to find relevant information. One only has to look. And that's what I did.

Oh, but you have to be veteran to have an opinion about guns in the United States. I'll remember to tell that to my father who built rifles for Winchester Repeating Arms, my uncle who's a veterans liaison for two towns, my grandfathers who fought in WWII and North Korea, my uncles who fought in Vietnam and all the other people who find it perfectly acceptable to discuss firearms with me. Most of them even agree with me on reform. In fact, one wants a weapons ban that I wouldn't necessarily support, but hey, only one opinion counts and that's GS. Give him a round of applause, ladies and gentlemen. He collects documents on the Internet!!

My opinion: if it's possible you can shot by someone, somewhere, you have a right to talk about it.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Of course I look to law to address the issue. What other option is there? However, I'm under no illusions that it would be a quick fix ... or a complete fix, for that matter. I mean, murder is illegal already.

Nor do I think shutting down conversation to be a good course of action. Any possible solution would need to have buy-in from both sides of this discussion. How are you going to achieve that by shutting discussion down? I think it's best that folks speak their views and work towards finding common ground. Perhaps neither side will be thrilled with the outcome, but if it makes headway against the problem, I reckon that's a good thing.

Just a thought: The NRA is a democratically-run private organization with several million members. When I was a kid, they were mostly a gun-safety group, I attended one of their classes in grade school in Florida, not too different in concept from the boating safety class some boat group put on which I also attended. They used to be okay with reasonable restrictions on gun ownership. Somewhere along the line, they became a hard-right 2nd Amendment rights group, I believe largely because a few people campaigned effectively to enter positions of power within the group and changed its course.

It's possible for several million gun control advocates to join the NRA and modify its positions considerably by exercising their votes within the group. The drawback is that they would have to send the NRA money and be active in it.

You do realize that a majority of the States have the right to bear arms in their Constitutions.  That's not dependent upon the NRA.