Chat Forum
It is currently Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:50 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1042 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 ... 27  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29314
The amendments are attempts to "modernise" it. "Bring it in line with modern values".

Which values changed, (e.g. slavery) but also regressed (e.g. the overbearing power of the Federal State, which is way above what the writers meant it to be, I would wager)
Freedom of the nation should be the overbearing principle, in all nation states (which is what the USA is, still).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 516
Wilson's Toffee wrote:

The USA has a great constitution, written by men who felt the brunt of colonialism and nationalism and war. Not a bunch of namby pamby politicians and lawyers brimming over with patriotic fervour in a time of relative peace (fought for by others)


Thomas Jefferson - Lawyer and Politician
James Madison - Politician
Thomas Paine - Politician and philosopher
John Adams - Lawyer and politician


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19740
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
You keep a law because it is RIGHT. And moral. Which the USA Constitution is.


The constitution which allowed from slavery is moral?

You really are thick as a post.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19740
BokJock wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:

The USA has a great constitution, written by men who felt the brunt of colonialism and nationalism and war. Not a bunch of namby pamby politicians and lawyers brimming over with patriotic fervour in a time of relative peace (fought for by others)


Thomas Jefferson - Lawyer and Politician
James Madison - Politician
Thomas Paine - Politician and philosopher
John Adams - Lawyer and politician

:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 35002
Location: Hut 8
Bullettyme wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
You keep a law because it is RIGHT. And moral. Which the USA Constitution is.


The constitution which allowed from slavery is moral?

You really are thick as a post.

You missed the Indian Removal Act and, "post slavery", the ensuing segregation = slavery.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29314
Bullettyme wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
You keep a law because it is RIGHT. And moral. Which the USA Constitution is.


The constitution which allowed from slavery is moral?

You really are thick as a post.



If you lived in that era you would have been a slave owner. Or wished you were one.


But ... you are Irish. Just mayhap you would have been a slave, though ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 46551
Location: Joint No. 3 to Cyprus
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
You keep a law because it is RIGHT. And moral. Which the USA Constitution is.


The constitution which allowed from slavery is moral?

You really are thick as a post.



If you lived in that era you would have been a slave owner. Or wished you were one.


But ... you are Irish. Just mayhap you would have been a slave, though ...


This is going really well for you :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4277
Location: 'ertfordshire
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
You keep a law because it is RIGHT. And moral. Which the USA Constitution is.


The constitution which allowed from slavery is moral?

You really are thick as a post.



If you lived in that era you would have been a slave owner. Or wished you were one.


But ... you are Irish. Just mayhap you would have been a slave, though ...

You utter twat.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19740
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
You keep a law because it is RIGHT. And moral. Which the USA Constitution is.


The constitution which allowed from slavery is moral?

You really are thick as a post.



If you lived in that era you would have been a slave owner. Or wished you were one.


But ... you are Irish. Just mayhap you would have been a slave, though ...


As I said, thick as a post.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6210
Bullettyme wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
You keep a law because it is RIGHT. And moral. Which the USA Constitution is.


The constitution which allowed from slavery is moral?

You really are thick as a post.


To be fair, that's more of a reflection on the fact that WT is a racist, who likely thinks slavery IS moral, rather than evidence of him being thick as a post. As long as it's not slavery of white folk, of course.

That's not to say he isn't "thick as a post", obviously.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29314
Bullettyme wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:

The USA has a great constitution, written by men who felt the brunt of colonialism and nationalism and war. Not a bunch of namby pamby politicians and lawyers brimming over with patriotic fervour in a time of relative peace (fought for by others)


Thomas Jefferson - Lawyer and Politician
James Madison - Politician
Thomas Paine - Politician and philosopher
John Adams - Lawyer and politician

:lol:



All suffered under colonialism.

Jefferson - Colonel of Militia.
Madison - Colonel of Militia.
Adams, the builder of teh Navy -
Quote:
Adams wrote that, "Power must be opposed to power, and interest to interest."[104] This sentiment was later echoed by James Madison's famous statement that, "[a]mbition must be made to counteract ambition", in The Federalist No. 51, explaining the separation of powers established under the new Constitution.[105][106] On the government's role in education Adams offered unambiguously that, "The whole people must take upon themselves the education of the whole people and be willing to bear the expenses of it. There should not be a district of one mile square, without a school in it, not founded by a charitable individual, but maintained at the public expense of the people themselves."[107]


Paine - a staymaker (ship's stays), excise officer and jailbird


The same men, yes. But not namby pamby, no ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29314
Demilich wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
You keep a law because it is RIGHT. And moral. Which the USA Constitution is.


The constitution which allowed from slavery is moral?

You really are thick as a post.


To be fair, that's more of a reflection on the fact that WT is a racist, who likely thinks slavery IS moral, rather than evidence of him being thick as a post. As long as it's not slavery of white folk, of course.

That's not to say he isn't "thick as a post", obviously.



You reckon so ? Did you ever read what I wrote about slavery ? Or races ? Or racism ?
Are you just the despicable little troll you always make out to be ... villifying others, of whom you know fokkol ?

Being a little shit will always be your way, it seems.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 46551
Location: Joint No. 3 to Cyprus
"The brunt of colonialism" here meaning "receiving significant military and financial support from overseas in the prosecution of a war which enabled them to become extremely rich and influential landowners"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 516
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:

The USA has a great constitution, written by men who felt the brunt of colonialism and nationalism and war. Not a bunch of namby pamby politicians and lawyers brimming over with patriotic fervour in a time of relative peace (fought for by others)


Thomas Jefferson - Lawyer and Politician
James Madison - Politician
Thomas Paine - Politician and philosopher
John Adams - Lawyer and politician

:lol:



All suffered under colonialism.


Jefferson - Colonel of Militia. - saw no military action
Madison - Colonel of Militia. - saw no military action

They were not military men, they were primarily namby pamby politicians. Adams and Paine definitely were not military men


Last edited by BokJock on Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7688
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
WT is the human equivalent of a black hole, to dense to measure, when you converse with him you run the very real risk of being trapped on the wrong side of his event horizon.

You get absorbed into his continual mental implosion, anything you say has a meaningless effect, you can’t penetrate that much stupid.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29314
Chuckles1188 wrote:
"The brunt of colonialism" here meaning "receiving significant military and financial support from overseas in the prosecution of a war which enabled them to become extremely rich and influential landowners"



Not necessarily. Oppression can also be an oppression of ideals. All spoke out against colonialism.

Jefferson is remembered as a slave owner. Yet he defended many slaves, fought for their right to be st free. Nobody mentions that. Are we going full revisionist now ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18387
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
"The brunt of colonialism" here meaning "receiving significant military and financial support from overseas in the prosecution of a war which enabled them to become extremely rich and influential landowners"



Not necessarily. Oppression can also be an oppression of ideals. All spoke out against colonialism.

Jefferson is remembered as a slave owner. Yet he defended many slaves, fought for their right to be st free. Nobody mentions that. Are we going full revisionist now ?

Err, it's regularly mentioned


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29314
houtkabouter wrote:
WT is the human equivalent of a black hole, to dense to measure, when you converse with him you run the very real risk of being trapped on the wrong side of his event horizon.

You get absorbed into his continual mental implosion, anything you say has a meaningless effect, you can’t penetrate that much stupid.



I am hammering the shit out of you and your sort, judging by the level of opprobium you try to stick to me.

Thanks for the compliment ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6098
Location: LOL! WISDOM!
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
"The brunt of colonialism" here meaning "receiving significant military and financial support from overseas in the prosecution of a war which enabled them to become extremely rich and influential landowners"


Not necessarily. Oppression can also be an oppression of ideals. All spoke out against colonialism.

Jefferson is remembered as a slave owner. Yet he defended many slaves, fought for their right to be st free. Nobody mentions that. Are we going full revisionist now ?


They were the f**king colonists.

The native Americans bore the brunt of colonialism


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29314
happyhooker wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
"The brunt of colonialism" here meaning "receiving significant military and financial support from overseas in the prosecution of a war which enabled them to become extremely rich and influential landowners"



Not necessarily. Oppression can also be an oppression of ideals. All spoke out against colonialism.

Jefferson is remembered as a slave owner. Yet he defended many slaves, fought for their right to be st free. Nobody mentions that. Are we going full revisionist now ?

Err, it's regularly mentioned



Not by these leftists.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29314
message #2527204 wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
"The brunt of colonialism" here meaning "receiving significant military and financial support from overseas in the prosecution of a war which enabled them to become extremely rich and influential landowners"


Not necessarily. Oppression can also be an oppression of ideals. All spoke out against colonialism.

Jefferson is remembered as a slave owner. Yet he defended many slaves, fought for their right to be st free. Nobody mentions that. Are we going full revisionist now ?


They were the f**king colonists.

The native Americans bore the brunt of colonialism


Always do. And some of the Irish also had a few aches and pains And a few other poor immigrants .. and farmers and homesteaders. And a few African slaves. And others... .

A few "colonialist" scalps were taken, a few women and men slaughtered, the women first raped, all tortured. A few kids murdered most cruelly.
For a couple of decades, nay more than a couple ....

All par for the course, yes ? They were the "colonialists "... after all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7688
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
WT is the human equivalent of a black hole, to dense to measure, when you converse with him you run the very real risk of being trapped on the wrong side of his event horizon.

You get absorbed into his continual mental implosion, anything you say has a meaningless effect, you can’t penetrate that much stupid.



I am hammering the shit out of you and your sort, judging by the level of opprobium you try to stick to me.

Thanks for the compliment ...
thank you for confirming my point :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6576
Location: Bloemfontein
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
WT is the human equivalent of a black hole, to dense to measure, when you converse with him you run the very real risk of being trapped on the wrong side of his event horizon.

You get absorbed into his continual mental implosion, anything you say has a meaningless effect, you can’t penetrate that much stupid.



I am hammering the shit out of you and your sort, judging by the level of opprobium you try to stick to me.

Thanks for the compliment ...


No Oom, you are defending the idea of easy access to deadly assault weapons as a right to freedom, because it is stipulated in the US Constitution. You are arguing that the death/murder of 17 people, including children, is the price US citizens have to pay to unsure that freedom.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1298
bessantj wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
bessantj wrote:
Soon this will be an America teacher going to work

Image


The hell is that?


I think it's from one of those animated Taiwanese news reports about America.

Its the type of teacher that Beavis and Butthead would have loved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 35002
Location: Hut 8
houtkabouter wrote:
WT is the human equivalent of a black hole, to dense to measure, when you converse with him you run the very real risk of being trapped on the wrong side of his event horizon.

You get absorbed into his continual mental implosion, anything you say has a meaningless effect, you can’t penetrate that much stupid.

Actually, tbf I don't think black holes have a density because density is a measure of mass per unit volume; what is the volume of a black hole?
- the singularity = zero
- the event horizon = not strictly the black hole

A better analogy on every level would have been
"WT is the human equivalent of a white dwarf".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:55 am
Posts: 3249
Location: Newport, Gwent
Torquemada 1420 wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
WT is the human equivalent of a black hole, to dense to measure, when you converse with him you run the very real risk of being trapped on the wrong side of his event horizon.

You get absorbed into his continual mental implosion, anything you say has a meaningless effect, you can’t penetrate that much stupid.

Actually, tbf I don't think black holes have a density because density is a measure of mass per unit volume; what is the volume of a black hole?
- the singularity = zero
- the event horizon = not strictly the black hole

A better analogy on every level would have been
"WT is the human equivalent of a white dwarf".

?

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 35002
Location: Hut 8
bessantj wrote:
Torquemada 1420 wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
WT is the human equivalent of a black hole, to dense to measure, when you converse with him you run the very real risk of being trapped on the wrong side of his event horizon.

You get absorbed into his continual mental implosion, anything you say has a meaningless effect, you can’t penetrate that much stupid.

Actually, tbf I don't think black holes have a density because density is a measure of mass per unit volume; what is the volume of a black hole?
- the singularity = zero
- the event horizon = not strictly the black hole

A better analogy on every level would have been
"WT is the human equivalent of a white dwarf".

?

Image

Intellectually. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 46551
Location: Joint No. 3 to Cyprus
Worth reading:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... source=twb
Quote:
As I opened the CT scan last week to read the next case, I was baffled. The history simply read “gunshot wound.” I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the nation for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury that I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ like the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, grey bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, with extensive bleeding. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

The reaction in the emergency room was the same. One of the trauma surgeons opened a young victim in the operating room, and found only shreds of the organ that had been hit by a bullet from an AR-15, a semi-automatic rifle which delivers a devastatingly lethal, high-velocity bullet to the victim. There was nothing left to repair, and utterly, devastatingly, nothing that could be done to fix the problem. The injury was fatal.

A year ago, when a gunman opened fire at the Fort Lauderdale airport with a 9mm semiautomatic handgun, hitting 11 people in 90 seconds, I was also on call. It was not until I had diagnosed the third of the six victims who were transported to the trauma center that I realized something out-of-the-ordinary must have happened. The gunshot wounds were the same low velocity handgun injuries as those I diagnose every day; only their rapid succession set them apart. And all six of the victims who arrived at the hospital that day survived.

Routine handgun injuries leave entry and exit wounds and linear tracks through the victim's body that are roughly the size of the bullet. If the bullet does not directly hit something crucial like the heart or the aorta, and they do not bleed to death before being transported to our care at a trauma center, chances are, we can save the victim. The bullets fired by an AR-15 are different; they travel at higher velocity and are far more lethal. The damage they cause is a function of the energy they impart as they pass through the body. A typical AR-15 bullet leaves the barrel traveling almost three times faster than, and imparting more than three times the energy of, a typical 9mm bullet from a handgun. An AR-15 rifle outfitted with a magazine cartridge with 50 rounds allows many more lethal bullets to be delivered quickly without reloading.

I have seen a handful of AR-15 injuries in my career. I saw one from a man shot in the back by a SWAT team years ago. The injury along the path of the bullet from an AR-15 is vastly different from a low-velocity handgun injury. The bullet from an AR-15 passes through the body like a cigarette boat travelling at maximum speed through a tiny canal. The tissue next to the bullet is elastic—moving away from the bullet like waves of water displaced by the boat—and then returns and settles back. This process is called cavitation; it leaves the displaced tissue damaged or killed. The high-velocity bullet causes a swath of tissue damage that extends several inches from its path. It does not have to actually hit an artery to damage it and cause catastrophic bleeding. Exit wounds can be the size of an orange.

With an AR-15, the shooter does not have to be particularly accurate. The victim does not have to be unlucky. If a victim takes a direct hit to the liver from an AR-15, the damage is far graver than that of a simple handgun shot injury. Handgun injuries to the liver are generally survivable unless the bullet hits the main blood supply to the liver. An AR-15 bullet wound to the middle of the liver would cause so much bleeding that the patient would likely never make it to a trauma center to receive our care.

One of my ER colleagues was waiting nervously for his own children outside the school. While the shooting was still in progress, the first responders were gathering up victims whenever they could and carrying them outside the building. Even as a physician trained in trauma situations, though, there was nothing he could do at the scene to help to save the victims who had been shot with an AR-15. Most of them died on the spot, with no fighting chance at life.

As a doctor, I feel I have a duty to inform the public of what I have learned as I have observed these wounds and cared for these patients. It’s clear to me that AR-15 or other high-velocity weapons, especially when outfitted with a high-capacity magazine, have no place in a civilian’s gun cabinet. I have friends who own AR-15 rifles; they enjoy shooting them at target practice for sport, and fervently defend their right to own them. But I cannot accept that their right to enjoy their hobby supersedes my right to send my own children to school, to a movie theater, or to a concert and to know that they are safe. Can the answer really be to subject our school children to active shooter drills—to learn to hide under desks, turn off the lights, lock the door and be silent—instead of addressing the root cause of the problem and passing legislation to take AR-15-style weapons out of the hands of civilians?

But in the aftermath of this shooting, in the face of specific questioning, our government leaders did not want to discuss gun control even when asked directly about these issues. Florida Senator Marco Rubio warned not to “jump to conclusions that there’s some law we could have passed that could have prevented it.” A reporter asked House Speaker Paul Ryan about gun control, and he replied, “As you know, mental health is often a big problem underlying these tragedies.” And on Tuesday, Florida’s state legislature voted against considering a ban on AR-15-type rifles, 71 to 36.

If politicians want to back comprehensive mental-health reform, I am all for it. As a medical doctor, I’ve witnessed firsthand the toll that mental-health issues take on families and the individuals themselves who have no access to satisfactory long-term mental-health care. But the president and Congress should not use this issue as an excuse to deliberately overlook the fact that the use of AR-15 rifles is the common denominator in many mass shootings.

A medical professor taught me about the dangers of drawing incorrect conclusions from data with the example of gum chewing, smokers, and lung cancer. He said smokers may be more likely to chew gum to cover bad breath, but that one cannot look at the data and decide that gum chewing causes lung cancer. It is the same type of erroneous logic that focuses on mental health after mass shootings, when banning the sale of semi-automatic rifles would be a far more effective means of preventing them.

Banning the AR-15 should not be a partisan issue. While there may be no consensus on many questions of gun control, there seems to be broad support for removing high-velocity, lethal weaponry and high-capacity magazines from the market, which would drastically reduce the incidence of mass murders. Every constitutionally guaranteed right that we are blessed to enjoy comes with responsibilities. Even our right to free speech is not limitless. Second Amendment gun rights must respect the same boundaries.

The CDC is the appropriate agency to review the potential impact of banning AR-15 style rifles and high-capacity magazines on the incidence of mass shootings. The agency was effectively barred from studying gun violence as a public-health issue in 1996 by a statutory provision known as the Dickey amendment. This provision needs to be repealed so that the CDC can study this issue and make sensible gun-policy recommendations to Congress.

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) of 1994 included language which prohibited semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15, and also large-capacity magazines with the ability to hold more than 10 rounds. The ban was allowed to expire after 10 years on September 13, 2004. The mass murders that followed the ban’s lapse make clear that it must be reinstated.

On Wednesday night, Rubio said at a town-hall event hosted by CNN that it is impossible to create effective gun regulations because there are too many “loopholes” and that a “plastic grip” can make the difference between a gun that is legal and illegal. But if we can see the different impacts of high- and low-velocity rounds clinically, then the government can also draw such distinctions.

As a radiologist, I have now seen high velocity AR-15 gunshot wounds firsthand, an experience that most radiologists in our country will never have. I pray that these are the last such wounds I have to see, and that AR-15-style weapons and high-capacity magazines are banned for use by civilians in the United States, once and for all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1196
Location: Embra
Was speaking to a Florida-based paediatrician at a conference last year. She told me that if she is treating a child who has been accidentally shot by a parent's gun she is forbidden under state law from giving the parents advice on safe storage of weapons. Because second amendment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29314
DraadkarD wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
WT is the human equivalent of a black hole, to dense to measure, when you converse with him you run the very real risk of being trapped on the wrong side of his event horizon.

You get absorbed into his continual mental implosion, anything you say has a meaningless effect, you can’t penetrate that much stupid.



I am hammering the shit out of you and your sort, judging by the level of opprobium you try to stick to me.

Thanks for the compliment ...


No Oom, you are defending the idea of easy access to deadly assault weapons as a right to freedom, because it is stipulated in the US Constitution. You are arguing that the death/murder of 17 people, including children, is the price US citizens have to pay to unsure that freedom.


No I am not. Read again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19740
Smutley wrote:
Was speaking to a Florida-based paediatrician at a conference last year. She told me that if she is treating a child who has been accidentally shot by a parent's gun she is forbidden under state law from giving the parents advice on safe storage of weapons. Because second amendment.


Yeah, it's also illegal under state law in Florida to even keep a registry of peoples guns. Because that's a form of harassment and second amendment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:55 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10120
Location: Texas
Bullettyme wrote:
Smutley wrote:
Was speaking to a Florida-based paediatrician at a conference last year. She told me that if she is treating a child who has been accidentally shot by a parent's gun she is forbidden under state law from giving the parents advice on safe storage of weapons. Because second amendment.


Yeah, it's also illegal under state law in Florida to even keep a registry of peoples guns. Because that's a form of harassment and second amendment.

The Docs vs Glocks case was decided in favor of the Docs last year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19740
Mr Mike wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
Smutley wrote:
Was speaking to a Florida-based paediatrician at a conference last year. She told me that if she is treating a child who has been accidentally shot by a parent's gun she is forbidden under state law from giving the parents advice on safe storage of weapons. Because second amendment.


Yeah, it's also illegal under state law in Florida to even keep a registry of peoples guns. Because that's a form of harassment and second amendment.

The Docs vs Glocks case was decided in favor of the Docs last year.


A step towards sanity I guess.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 23338
Location: Middle East
Now that Trump himself has repeated the suggestion to arm the teachers, I'm very reassured that Beardy McElbowpatch will now be extremely suitable to fend off any school shootings after a whole free periods worth of gun safety training.
I just hope the shooter is good enough to wait until our heroic teachers can save up to buy their own weaponry as I doubt the education budget will stretch to buying Glocks for all teeachers, given that may teachers are already having to buy their own classes stationery supplies
http://time.com/money/4392319/teachers- ... -supplies/

The problem with arming teachers is that it doesn't go far enough. They need to militarize the classrooms. Any military personnel wishing to honourably discharge should spend a year as a teachers aide as part of the transition to civvie street, which would help them make the adjustment for a start. They would still be uniformed and kitted up, and could help instill a bit of discipline, pride, and appreciation for short haircuts among the students.
Artillery types could teach mathematics, EOD chemistry, and Marines could show the kindergartners which crayons taste the best.

They could assist with gym/PT, sports programs etc... but best of all, the newly enriched military budget would actually now be helping with education.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 30042
Location: Chickenrunning...
Turbogoat wrote:
Now that Trump himself has repeated the suggestion to arm the teachers, I'm very reassured that Beardy McElbowpatch will now be extremely suitable to fend off any school shootings after a whole free periods worth of gun safety training.
I just hope the shooter is good enough to wait until our heroic teachers can save up to buy their own weaponry as I doubt the education budget will stretch to buying Glocks for all teeachers, given that may teachers are already having to buy their own classes stationery supplies
http://time.com/money/4392319/teachers- ... -supplies/

The problem with arming teachers is that it doesn't go far enough. They need to militarize the classrooms. Any military personnel wishing to honourably discharge should spend a year as a teachers aide as part of the transition to civvie street, which would help them make the adjustment for a start. They would still be uniformed and kitted up, and could help instill a bit of discipline, pride, and appreciation for short haircuts among the students.
Artillery types could teach mathematics, EOD chemistry, and Marines could show the kindergartners which crayons taste the best.

They could assist with gym/PT, sports programs etc... but best of all, the newly enriched military budget would actually now be helping with education.


Nice :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 49389
Location: Oundle
The USA has got itself into an awful position. How many more of these shootings will make them wake up and realise that their priorities are very wrong indeed.

They are not out of the woods on climate change either. China is catching them up fast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1196
Location: Embra
Mr Mike wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
Smutley wrote:
Was speaking to a Florida-based paediatrician at a conference last year. She told me that if she is treating a child who has been accidentally shot by a parent's gun she is forbidden under state law from giving the parents advice on safe storage of weapons. Because second amendment.


Yeah, it's also illegal under state law in Florida to even keep a registry of peoples guns. Because that's a form of harassment and second amendment.

The Docs vs Glocks case was decided in favor of the Docs last year.

:thumbup:

Completely insane that this should even be an issue, shows how far up the US arse the NRA has its fingers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6098
Location: LOL! WISDOM!
Quote:
....on Tuesday, Florida’s state legislature voted against considering a ban on AR-15-type rifles, 71 to 36.


f**king idiots


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 23338
Location: Middle East
message #2527204 wrote:
Quote:
....on Tuesday, Florida’s state legislature voted against considering a ban on AR-15-type rifles, 71 to 36.


f**king idiots


Would it have been anything more than tokenism though? There are plenty of other similar weapons that fire the same ammunition just as effectively in a school shooting situation. Virtually all existing AR-15s are modular enough that they could easily be adapted to an unrecognizable and suddenly more legal weapon.

I'd hate to think that they put all their energy and call in every favour they can to push this through, as it wouldn't be enough to achieve what they'd want it to.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:51 pm
Posts: 1276
Can anyone who is pro-gun or even sympathetic to the American position, tell me why they think that even armed teachers (or any other civilian) will be prepared to take that gun out and place themselves in harm's way to try and shoot somebody, who likely had a more powerful weapon, when that person will have already demonstrated that they are prepared to shoot and kill?

Would you walk into a hallway to shoot someone who was emptying a magazine from an assault rifle?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1042 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 ... 27  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Banana Man, camroc1, chaddy, Chilli, clydecloggie, diarm, Diego, earl the beaver, Farva, KnuckleDragger, koroke hangareka, Lorthern Nights, Margin_Walker, mikemac, Monk Zombie, Mr Mike, Nolanator, penguin, Plato'sCave, quarter2four, Raggs, redderneck, rett, rialtoblue, slick, tc27, The Native, Toro, Wallah, xbgo1, Xupi and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group