Gun-related Deaths in America Eclipse Terrorism

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

37 minutes ago, eieio said:

I see from the amount of gun hating individuals.....even on this forum....it is such a relief that Trump won and appointed a sumpreme court judge that will uphold the constitution. 

 

Imagine the gun hating nut job that Hillary would have appointed.

 

And if you took guns away from all legal non minorities,  not in inner cities the gun crime rate would be very very small 

[Ban Hammer 13,726]

6 hours ago, JimandChristy said:

Really? I've lived in both countries and I feel just as much freedom here in the US than I did in the UK. What a load of poppycock.

how many surveillance cameras have you been on in the usa?

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, Ban Hammer said:

how many surveillance cameras have you been on in the usa?

All those freedoms makes one lose count. 

[Ban Hammer 13,726]

4 hours ago, JimandChristy said:

I'm aware of what the second amendment is, it's outdated and written at a time when muskets we're the main weapon of choice. It needs an upgrade because we're living in the 21st century.

 

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, Ban Hammer said:

 

Interesting question. I'm sure a rational leftist can explain. 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

3 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Interesting question. I'm sure a rational leftist can explain. 

  Don't you think the meme was made by a rightist? It would be better to have a rational rightist explain it. Good luck with that.

 

  I don't see any evidence that we have a living constitution. It's 1 step removed from being carved in stone. Changes require formal amendments. The amendment process is prohibitively difficult. Given the current state of politics, It's questionable if well ever see another one in our life time regardless of need. There has only been 1 in the last 50 years. That's not how you define living.

[IAMX 3,055]

14 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

  Don't you think the meme was made by a rightist? It would be better to have a rational rightist explain it. Good luck with that.

 

  I don't see any evidence that we have a living constitution. It's 1 step removed from being carved in stone. Changes require formal amendments. The amendment process is prohibitively difficult. Given the current state of politics, It's questionable if well ever see another one in our life time regardless of need. There has only been 1 in the last 50 years. That's not how you define living.

That's a nice story and all but the living document theory isn't about amending the Constitution, it's about judicial review, e.g. living document theory vs. originalism. It's the basis for Roe v. Wade.

Edited August 19, 2017 by IAMX

[Steeleballz 7,550]

11 minutes ago, IAMX said:

That's a nice story and all but the living document theory isn't about amending the Constitution, it's about judicial review, e.g. living document theory vs. originalism. It's the basis for Roe v. Wade.

    Originalists maintain that the amendment process is the correct way to change the constitution. Since living document vs originalism are the two most common alternative approaches to interpretation, it strange to say it's not about amending the constitution. One approach says it is, and one says it isn't. That's the focal argument between them.

 

   Well anyway thanks for giving an example from 45 years ago as proof of how we have a living document. Your story was nice too.

 

   

  

   

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, Steeleballz said:

    Originalists maintain that the amendment process is the correct way to change the constitution. Since living document vs originalism are the two most common alternative approaches to interpretation, it strange to say it's not about amending the constitution. One approach says it is, and one says it isn't. That's the focal argument between them.

 

   Well anyway thanks for giving an example from 45 years ago as proof of how we have a living document. Your story was nice too.

 

   

  

   

Living document theory describes judicial review, not amending the Constitution, so describing how many amendments the Constitution has is irrelevant.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Won't fit the narrowtive of many on here, but while you are busy getting your panties in a bunch about gun deaths, the majority of which are caused by an element that should have already been in jail, ponder this much larger number of deaths in America, and why nothing is being done about it...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/05/03/researchers-medical-errors-now-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-united-states/?utm_term=.a82a6064c02f

[Steeleballz 7,550]

18 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Living document theory describes judicial review, not amending the Constitution, so describing how many amendments the Constitution has is irrelevant.

   You already said that. To reiterate, I asked for an explanation from rational right. I'm not getting either here.

[IAMX 3,055]

3 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

   You already said that. To reiterate, I asked for an explanation from rational right. I'm not getting either here.

Well no, it was me who asked for a rational leftist to explain the meme charles provided. I'm not getting that here. 

 

Edited August 19, 2017 by IAMX

[Steeleballz 7,550]

10 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Well no, it was me who asked for a rational leftist to explain the meme charles provided. I'm not getting that here. 

 

 

     

[ready4ONE 5,400]

10 hours ago, IAMX said:

Factual levels of danger..

 

I can totally see this poster going on about how dangerous ghettos are, where the disproportionate amount of shootings take place.

 

Or was it white cops. 

 

Cuz logical:

 

 

But then again, someone who whines about white supremacists and "fascists" (whatever that means) being a threat, far from rational.

I don't live near any ghettos, yet shootings are far more common than they should be. The Racist theories being bandied about in this thread that it is disproportionally Blacks in the ghetto doesn't fly in my area since there are no ghettos, thus are simply stupid.

 

The closest thing to a terrorist attack around here was a guy with a Muslimy name, mental health issues, and access to dads legally owned guns.

 

It's irrational to advocate banning Muslims for the spurious fear of Islamic Terrorism but completely disregard the actual day to day gun carnage in the US. The numbers don't lie, and they don't add up either.

[IAMX 3,055]

7 hours ago, ready4ONE said:

I don't live near any ghettos, yet shootings are far more common than they should be. The Racist theories being bandied about in this thread that it is disproportionally Blacks in the ghetto doesn't fly in my area since there are no ghettos, thus are simply stupid.

 

The closest thing to a terrorist attack around here was a guy with a Muslimy name, mental health issues, and access to dads legally owned guns.

 

It's irrational to advocate banning Muslims for the spurious fear of Islamic Terrorism but completely disregard the actual day to day gun carnage in the US. The numbers don't lie, and they don't add up either.

Stats be racist.